Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 128: 128: Clause 64, page 35, leave out lines 4 to 10 The noble Lord said: This group of amendments—Amendments Nos. 128, 128B and 153—deals with two issues. The first is to flag up what has been alluded to previously in passing: the ability of councils to change their means of executive arrangements. That sounds innocuous. It means that councils will be able to decide—without referendum, without reference to the people—that they want to move either to an elected mayor or to an elected executive. If it goes through in that form and a referendum is not required, it will lead to a degree of public scandal in some places. Amendment No. 153 is about the role of the leader of the council or the elected mayor. If there is a proposal to move in the opposite direction from an elected mayor to a leader and cabinet system, in effect it is to remove what the Government are doing, which is to give an elected mayor a veto over such a move so that no move can take place unless the elected mayor or the leader of the council agrees to it. That is quite wrong. If there is a move locally to change the system of executive arrangements, that should be done in a democratic way, rather than giving one person, who has a personal vested interest, a veto over it. As we know, there are a number of places where elected mayors and elected mayoral systems have got into bother, while others are working quite well. If it is the view of the Government that changes should be possible, those changes should not be subject to such a veto. I beg to move.