It has been rather a surreal debate this afternoon, because for at least two-thirds of it we have been discussing action that has predated the legislation. Clause 21 gives more detail on that. It permits the Secretary of State to invite authorities to restructure before the Bill is itself enacted: we are discussing a clause giving her the power to undertake what she is already doing. The reality is that if the Secretary of State is not acting against the law, she is certainly not within the law, as the law does not exist. We are taking legislation through Parliament simply to justify actions that she is already undertaking.
There is nothing to stop the Secretary of State from amending this Bill as she goes along to best fit the law to her purposes. Earlier government amendments seem to do just that, narrowing the consultation process. I cannot see why the Government have chosen to include this part of the Bill, given that the Secretary of State is simply going on with the plans regardless. This part of the Bill is simply an exercise in formality; it is little more than a withdrawal from parliamentary proceedings to expect both Houses merely to rubber-stamp practices that are going on elsewhere. In a sense, we can guarantee that anything we have debated in Committee today will not be taken away and looked at, because the Secretary of State is already operating under these draft criteria that have not been agreed.
As I said at the outset, we are debating this legislation with our hands tied behind our back. I do not know why the Government have decided to legislate in this way, much as I cannot see why your Lordships are expected to sanction it. Nevertheless, it is important that the Minister clarifies Clause 21. I would be grateful if, in doing so, she could say what steps would be taken if the Secretary of State were, for example, to name a local authority, only to have the power to do so removed from this Bill. This is quite plainly retrospective legislation, even though the Minister has said that it comes within powers already in the Secretary of State’s hands. I am prepared to hear the Government’s case, but I feel uneasy about how this has been presented. Clause 21 does not make me feel any better.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 5 July 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
693 c1204-5 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:17:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408986
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408986
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408986