Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

We have some sympathy with the underlying aim of the proposed new clause, which was debated in another place at several stages of the Bill. However, we have doubts about whether it is necessary. As the noble Baroness said, under the notion of eligibility which we have just discussed, it would certainly empower parish councils to enter into guarantees if to do so would contribute to the economic, social or environmental well-being of the area. That is an important development, and there is no legally imposed limit on the value of such guarantees. The new clause is superfluous when it comes to those. It is reasonable that the Committee should want to consider whether an additional measure is needed and whether the proposed new clause is adequate. During the long national debate that took place before we framed the proposals to modernise the law relating to parish councils, this issue hardly surfaced. There was no strong groundswell in favour of addressing the power to issue guarantees, which may be because all parish councils already have some scope to provide them. Under Section 137 of the Local Government Act, a parish council can provide guarantees for a voluntary organisation operating in its area. I know that it is limited to the amount per local government elector of £5.64 per annum, and it could not guarantee very large sums, but it might do the village fete or the local cricket club. The power is there. There is also additional capacity in Section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972, which is a power for local authorities to do anything that is calculated to facilitate or is conducive or incidental to the discharge of any of their functions. I am advised that it provides an implied power for councils, including parishes, to set up companies that could be limited by guarantee. I am sorry to say that I do not think there is a compelling case. Parishes seem to be getting along pretty well without it, and on that basis I have to resist the amendment.