I cannot resist commenting that if there were less detail in the Bill it would not be necessary to spell out quite so much in this clause. If ““guidance””, which should have only its natural meaning, includes a model petition scheme, it ought not to be necessary to say that a local authority may or may not adopt the model because it is only there as part of the guidance. One would not then need to go into powers of intervention.
I understand better the Minister’s point that the Government want to be sure that authorities, in setting up their schemes, which we continue to believe should be of their own design, do not set the threshold at some absurd number—more than 1,000 people or whatever—that would turn it into a petition to which they would need to respond in some way. I continue to feel that the politics of the situation will prompt local authorities, but that is part of the larger debate.
I am grateful for the Minister’s response. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 131 withdrawn.
Amendment 132 not moved.
Clause 19 agreed.
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 3 February 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
707 c135-6GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:33:00 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_525428
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_525428
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_525428