Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I appreciate the way the noble Baroness has addressed this issue. She is right to raise the recommendation of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee and to invite me to respond to them. Much of what I shall say will reflect what I said in relation to parish councils and the burdens that we recognise petitions might put on them. This amendment gives effect to the recommendation made by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. It argued that the negative resolution procedure is appropriate for the order-making powers relating to the other bodies listed in Clause 20. In our response, we stated that we understand its concerns and its search for consistency, but there are good reasons to think that the negative resolution procedure would be appropriate. The Government will meet the cost of any new burdens put on parish or community councils, and we would not make such an order without first consulting the representative bodies of those institutions to seek their views about how the duty should be framed so that the diversity of behaviour in the situation, which was pointed out by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, could be met in those cases. As I said, my officials met the National Association of Local Councils and discussed the prospect of having some form of petition duty, and it has given a positive response so far. If the Secretary of State is minded to draft an order on this issue, the details of any consultation and the responses received would be set out in the Explanatory Memorandum accompanying all statutory instruments. That would give people the confidence of knowing that there had been proper consultation. Obviously, if the Merits Committee also considered the consultation to be inadequate, or if the memorandum revealed that the responses indicated that the sector did not welcome the imposition of such a duty, and the Government were intent on imposing one, that would be drawn to the attention of the House. However, I expect that any consultation would reveal strong support for the extension of some form of duty by the sector so that it could respond to petitions to parishes or community councils. On the basis that we would proceed with consensus, we think that the affirmative revolution, which is a very serious and heavy power that takes up parliamentary time in this House, would be inappropriate and too heavy. That is why we have replied to the DPRRC’s report in the way that we have. In the scenario that I have outlined, the negative procedure would be sufficient.