In that case, I will speak to my amendments and give the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, a chance to catch up on his amendments in this group. Before I do so, I declare an interest as an ambassador for Sporta, the trade group of social enterprises which deals with local sports and leisure services, and as the founding chair of the Social Enterprise Coalition. I shall speak to Amendments 130A and 131A, and comment on some other amendments in this group, although I may leave that until they have been spoken to. My noble friend Lord Patel is right to say that Clause 68 is important. I have always believed that socially owned businesses, founded and run in this case by local people, have an important and valuable role to play in the provision of public services.
Amendment 130A seeks to put beyond doubt the kind of enterprise which can challenge and be considered appropriate to contract for the services under consideration. I seek clarification from the Minister about this because, as it stands, it seems that the expression of interest could be used by local authority employees setting up a private company. I believe that that might be a loophole that would need to be closed. Amendment 130A states that, "““after ‘authority’ insert ‘who have formed an organisation for charitable purposes or a community interest company or industrial and provident society’””."
That covers basically all the organisations that are not private enterprises.
Amendment 131A again seeks to make completely clear an issue which is, in a way, about the size of the organisation. I believe that there should be a requirement that the expression of interest can be initiated by a local organisation or in collaboration with a local organisation. Many national charities already provide and contract for services at a local level—for example, Barnardo’s and Action for Children, which I know about through a long association with them. I believe that those national charities, along with any national social enterprise—indeed, there are those that are contracting which are building social businesses providing social care—would want to contract for those services at a local level. But they have to prove that they are working collaboratively with local agencies to provide locally integrated solutions.
This would still allow national organisations, which have great skills and experience in delivering these services, to bid but would ensure that the Bill meets its main objective of devolving power and giving a voice to local communities. The involvement of a national social enterprise or a national charity may be the difference between a local body being able to challenge and contract for local services and it not having the capacity to do so. It is important that large and small, and local and national, collaborative working is part of this Bill and is put beyond doubt. That is what these two amendments are about. I beg to move.
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Thornton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 5 July 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c171-2 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 18:14:45 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756931
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756931
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756931