Local Transport Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 78B: 78B: Clause 72, page 62, line 18, at end insert— ““( ) A change to constitutional arrangements by virtue of this section is to be made only with the consent of the authorities comprised in the ITA area.”” The noble Lord said: In speaking to Amendment No. 78B, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 80A and 80B. These amendments refer to the new arrangements for ITAs in Part 5. It is my view that local authorities that could be affected by new and revised ITA arrangements should be consulted and should consent to any change in their areas, which is very similar to some that we have already discussed. The implications of not having the consent of local authorities are great at present. The Bill would allow the ITA to be the mechanism for opposing road pricing on a local authority which has decided that it does not want such a scheme in its area. That would certainly contravene the asserted principle that these matters are for local authorities to decide. An authority may decide against road pricing because its electors are against it, which would be the most important reason against setting up a scheme. Amendment No. 78B seeks to ensure that changes to constitutional arrangements are agreed to by authorities in the ITA area. The Bill allows a Secretary of State to appoint non-elected members to an ITA. There are several arguments against having non-elected members on an ITA and there is a real possibility for excluding or watering down the influence of one or more of the authorities within it. Members of local authorities whose powers are to be diluted, in this case giving non-elected members voting rights, should be accountable to voters if they support such a dilution. Clause 74 allows the Secretary of State to delegate a function of a local authority to an ITA. Amendment No. 80A seeks to ensure that the local authorities whose functions are to be removed consent to that change. In the case of the delegation of road charging function, the ITA could have the power to introduce road charging without the consent of constituent authorities, as I have said. There is a provision to make it a requirement for some consultation and approval by both Houses of Parliament, but that neglects the need for local accountability. None of the provisions would themselves, or in combination, prevent an order being made against the will of a local authority. Road charging could be imposed in an area by a local authority that does not want it. For similar reasons, Amendment No. 80B seeks to make a requirement that local authorities consent to the direction that can be given to them by an ITA. The potential again exists here for an authority to be directed on road charging without its consent. I beg to move.