My Lords, it seems a long time ago now, but I spent 28 years in local government. The noble Lord, Lord Greaves, has done the House a favour in tabling this amendment because it has enabled us to have this useful, fundamental debate before we get into the detail. As I was unable to speak at Second Reading, I should declare myself as a landowner in Essex, in case anyone wishes to raise it at any point.
The noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, has pointed out the problem with the amendment. There is much in it with which one could agree in principle. I think similarly to the noble Lord that, the more one tries to define localism, the more one is at risk of destroying it. Once you start to spell it out in words of one syllable which ordinary people can understand, you begin to restrict freedom of action. As I understand it, the purpose of localism is to get local matters back into the control of local people as much as one reasonably can. However, the Bill does not tackle the fundamental problem that is faced by all, which is the issue of local government finance. When I was first a Member, my county received less than 50 per cent of its finances from the centre. I remember warning the council in those days of the dangers if that balance shifted. Today, the balance is somewhere near 80 per cent from the centre. Whatever we do in the Bill, there will always be that fundamental weakness: the ability of the centre to control events at a local level because of a lack of financial independence.
If anyone wants to try to interpret the Bill, they should first read this debate. Everything that has been said is appropriate and relevant and it has been very useful to have this discussion. I look forward to hearing what my noble friend on the Front Bench has to say, but I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, will not take the amendment any further. It seems to me that he has achieved what he wanted in having this debate. If we tried to put this down in writing, I am sure that we could all think of additional words and words that we would prefer not to see, but if an issue came before the courts on this basis, I think we would be giving them an impossible task. Having had the debate, I hope that the matter goes no further.
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Dixon-Smith
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 June 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c1054-5 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:36:34 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750740
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750740
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750740