My Lords, that was an amusing exchange. I look forward to seeing the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, taking over as Secretary of State, although I do not think that the Secretary of State would appreciate that. This exchange is about matters which I have answered briefly, although, I appreciate, not in detail.
We believe that it is important that we clearly set out who should run the community right to buy. Clause 91 defines what we mean by local authority and who will be responsible for administering the provisions. It makes sense that a decision on listing is made directly by the local democratic authority, rather than any other. For that reason, we have chosen to give powers to specified local authorities to run the scheme.
Where there is more than one local authority in an area, we have decided that, in most cases, implementation of the scheme should be by the local authority with the relevant planning powers. That would mean that, in two-tier areas, the running of the scheme would fall to the district council. However, in the case of the national parks and the Broads Authority, which have planning powers for the area but are not elected authorities, we have left administration of the scheme with the local authority as having democratic accountability. We would expect the local authority to liaise with the local national park or the Broads Authority where appropriate. We also consider it important to retain the Secretary of State's power by order, if necessary, to amend the definition of local authority in the light of experience. Amendment 147A would remove that power, so we resist it.
Amendments 147FA and 147FB would give powers to a national park authority and the Broads Authority to make decisions on what is listed and to run the scheme. National parks and the Broads Authority have members appointed by the local authorities, but they are not themselves democratically accountable local authorities, so they would fall outside the scope of the definition of local authority.
Amendment 147FZA would replace the current list in Clause 91 of what counts as a local authority for the new list. Some items are the same, but the proposed new list would allow a county council in a two-tier area to take responsibility for administering the scheme by agreement with the district council or councils. That would remove the important link between these provisions and the planning authority. The new list also omits the Common Council—the City of London—and the Council of the Islands of Scilly and deletes the Secretary of State’s power to amend the list later for England, although not the power of Welsh Ministers to do the same in Wales. For the reasons I have given, I cannot accept the amendments, and I hope that noble Lords will feel able not to press them.
Amendment 147FZA withdrawn.
Amendments 147FA and 147FB not moved.
Clause 91 agreed.
Clauses 92 and 93 agreed.
Amendment 147FC
Moved by
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 7 July 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c429-30 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:46:03 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_758235
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_758235
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_758235