Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

I hope that I can help the Committee by briefly explaining what Clause 59 does. It allows a local authority to change the name of any of its electoral areas—district wards or county divisions—by resolution of the authority at a special meeting. That is our interpretation of the clause. Where the name of an electoral area is protected, a resolution cannot be passed until the Electoral Commission has agreed to the change. The name of an electoral area is deemed to be protected if it has been specified under the Acts in subsection (6)(a) within the past five years. Particular circumstances protect some areas. The current position is that the name of an electoral area can be changed only by the Electoral Commission following a full electoral review, which takes about 12 months. We are making that change following an evaluation of the periodic electoral review process. The Electoral Commission requested the change. It considers that given that the council can change the name of the district, the parishes and parish wards within the district, it should also be able to change the name of the district wards. This is part of devolving power and flexibility to local authorities. Local authorities should be able to change the names of their electoral areas as they see fit unless they are protected, as I said. On the point made by the noble Baroness Lady Hamwee, the Local Government Act 1972 already makes provision for the procedural requirements for meetings of local authorities so the question of notice is already covered. It includes requirements about notice and voting. We do not think that it is necessary to supplement the existing provision in this Bill with regard to that issue. As I said, I agree with the Committee that names are important and the issue can be emotive. We accept that, but we are trying not to be too specific or prescriptive, as the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, suggested I might say. The aim is one of devolution; to trust local authorities to act reasonably and consult those parties who are interested. We will discuss Clause 139 tomorrow, but in this provision we are trying to devolve decisions to local authorities. We do not consider that a two-thirds majority should be required for a name change in an electoral area. It is unlikely that a name change would be of interest to all members of the council and it would be too great a restriction on an authority to require a two-thirds majority. I hope that the noble Baroness will consider withdrawing her amendment. I am glad that this matter is interesting. How names are changed is important, and I do not want to diminish its importance by saying that we need to trust local authorities to act reasonably.