Noble Lords opposite have consistently argued that the Bill should not cover unnecessary things. Things are happening in local government, so why pass legislation? In these clauses, they are in danger of falling into their own trap. These things are happening in local authorities. Where they want to do them, they can. I am leader of the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities and can give two examples of where we collectively work on a scrutiny system. When local authorities were given the ability to scrutinise health, it seemed rather odd to have 10 separate health scrutinies in Greater Manchester as we had a Greater Manchester Health Authority and hospitals—specialist hospitals, in particular—were serving a range of clients across the Greater Manchester area. We therefore set up a single body with a representative from the 10 authorities that has effectively done a number of studies on healthcare in Greater Manchester. Even when the Government reorganised the health service yet again, so that we now have a North West Strategic Health Authority, we felt it important to continue the scrutiny at Greater Manchester level.
As the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, said, Greater Manchester was one of the first authorities to get an MAA. It was clear to us that we needed to strengthen the role of the executive—the leaders of the Greater Manchester authorities—working together, and we needed to create stronger powers of scrutiny for members who were not part of the executive to understand what was going on. We did that at two levels: at the Greater Manchester level where representatives of the 10 authorities come together, and at the level of individual authorities. It can be done, and we should get on and do it.
I am fascinated by the amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Tope. He wants to exclude police authorities. Why not the fire authorities and so on? He gave the game away when he talked about the amount of money being spent on scrutiny in the London area. Perhaps if less was spent on scrutiny and more on gritting, the capital would not have come to a halt after a sprinkling of snow.
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Smith of Leigh
(Labour)
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 c176-7GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:47:20 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_525495
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_525495
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_525495