Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

My Amendment No. 101 pursues some of the issues mentioned by my noble friend. Ward and division names are important. It was interesting to read the report of the House of Commons Public Bill Committee when it debated the issue. A number of Members of Parliament referred to the importance of names in a political context. There are several issues involved. The members of the committee were particularly concerned about the question of marginality, which, as they are Members of Parliament, I suppose they would be. A mixed composition ward might include a huge council estate and great deal of quite prosperous middle-class housing, and whether you name it after the council estate or after the prosperous housing makes a difference to the impression that people have of where that ward naturally lies in traditional political allegiances. That is the clear message that came across from the discussion in the House of Commons committee. We know that it is true. If you name the ward after the council estate, it sounds as though it might be a Labour ward; if you name it after the posh area, it sounds as though it might be a Tory ward. The truth is, of course, that it might be a safe Liberal Democrat ward. But perception is important. In marginal wards, whether people think it is worth bothering to go out and vote is a crucial matter in local elections and can make a real difference to the result. Amendment Nos. 100 and 101 run together. A change of name is an important decision and should require a two-thirds majority of the council. The Minister may say that we are being overprescriptive again and that we should leave this to local authorities. However, I come back to the point that I made on the first day of Committee that, for obvious reasons, electoral matters are different in kind from a great many of the other things that local authorities do. Decisions made about electoral matters can influence and determine the results of elections and the people making the electoral decisions may have a vested interest in them. I am not saying that they should not make such decisions, but they should have to think about them. First, my noble friend and I are suggesting that there should be a statutory publicity requirement so that authorities cannot sneak through decisions. Secondly, I am suggesting that it should be more difficult to pass changes to ward names than to make decisions on most of the other things that local authorities do. This is a part of the electoral process and the impositions on local authorities ought to be greater than they are.