Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 211A: 211A: Clause 109, page 70, line 6, at end insert ““only in respect of national improvement targets”” The noble Baroness said: Amendment No. 211A is part of a group of amendments tabled in my name. Their purpose is to lessen the involvement of the Secretary of State with regard to local area agreements by distinguishing between local and national targets and designations. The Secretary of State’s remit allows her the power not only to impose national improvement targets but also locally prescribed targets in each council. This is unsatisfactory for a number of reasons, not least because it contradicts the Government’s devolution ideals. It is not just the sentiment of the legislation that is worrying, but also the process itself. The Local Government Association suggested that it appears cumbersome and unwieldy and is another quagmire that threatens to undermine the laudable intentions of local area agreements. The process needs to be lean and dynamic, but it must above all be deliverable. For the sake of its credibility and value for money, there must be real substance underpinning the initiative. We strongly endorse national co-operation where there are exceptional circumstances, but the powers in the Bill open the floodgates to micromanagement through the targets culture. It passes control to the Government at the expense of locally elected politicians—a situation with which those of us who have worked in local government are all too familiar. Without these amendments, the Bill will incorporate yet another example of what local government sees as the mistrust of local authorities: a supposed safety net that stifles innovation and restricts councils in fulfilling their potential. Local area agreements have potential to become highly effective methods of channelling public funds to the areas where they are most needed and to achieve true synergies and co-operation across a number of bodies working together. The Government’s much cited rhetoric could have been embedded throughout the Bill. With these amendments, the opportunity is still there. Without agreeing to this amendment and others like it, the Government cannot be seen to be decentralising power and responsibility. We need to differentiate between the national and the local designation and keep the national to the absolute minimum. I beg to move.