UK Parliament / Open data

Localism Bill

I am grateful to my noble friend for making the point more strongly and better than I did. There is clearly an issue here and it is clearly one that will continue to be discussed. We look forward with interest to seeing the Government’s proposals for parishes, but the continuation of the point made by my noble friend Lord Taylor is: who pays for the referendum? If it is a district, county or unitary issue, surely that authority should pay for the referendum and the cost of it should not fall upon the parish council, which may well have a view on the matter and be involved in the discussions, but is not responsible in any way for the issue before the referendum. That is a very important matter. The noble Lord, Lord Beecham, made the point that there is possible provision in the Bill for local authorities to define appropriate local areas which are not co-incident with ward boundaries. It seems to me that a provision that they should be one polling district or a collection of polling districts is one that ought to be looked at by the Government, because polling districts, by their very nature, already have the machinery in place for elections, yet polling districts in most wards are smaller than the wards of which they form part. I put that suggestion to the Government and, on that basis, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 120H withdrawn. Amendments 120J and 121 not moved. Clause 43, as amended, agreed. Clause 44 : The required percentage Amendment 121A Clause 44 : The required percentage Amendment 121A Moved by

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

728 c1918 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber

Legislation

Localism Bill 2010-12
Back to top