Climate Change Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 183ZJ: 183ZJ: Clause 54, page 24, line 12, at end insert— ““( ) An order made under this section may confer powers on waste collection authorities to operate waste reduction schemes, but each waste collection authority shall have the power to decide whether or not to operate a scheme in relation to the whole or any part of the area of the authority. ( ) A waste collection authority that is operating a waste reduction scheme under an order made under this section may cease to operate the scheme at any time. ( ) A waste collection authority that is operating a waste reduction scheme may vary the scheme at any time in accordance with the provisions of an order made under this section.”” The noble Lord said: This is the last group to include an amendment in my name, and this one stands on its own as it is an important issue. I hope that the Government will be able to give us absolute and categorical assurances on this; if they do not, we have to come back to this major issue. Amendment No. 183ZJ says two things. First, if a waste minimisation scheme—this applies to many potential schemes—is rolled out after considering the results of the pilots, it must not be compulsory for local authorities to take part. It must be voluntary for waste collection authorities to decide for themselves whether they shall, "““operate a scheme in relation to the whole or any part of the area of the authority””." The Local Government Association agrees with me, at least on this; it would be quite wrong to have a national scheme, or even to have a menu or series of schemes, which was compulsory for all local authorities. In the spirit of what the Minister was saying previously, when he admonished me for my centralist proposals, it ought to be thus. My problem is that I do not trust future Governments—I talk not of this Government, but all future Governments, under any party—not to take powers if they have them, or not to do things that were not originally intended if they are not stopped from doing so. That is why it ought to be set out in the Bill, in appropriate language—which I do not suggest mine is—that local authorities cannot be compelled to take part in these schemes. Secondly, I suggest that local authorities should have the power to vary or to end a scheme once it has been set up. A scheme may have to be set up for a given period of time, so my wording that they, "““may cease to operate the scheme at any time””" may be a little too strong. However, local authorities taking part in a scheme really need the ability to close it down if they think it is not working satisfactorily for their area. A local authority may decide that for various reasons; it may be on practical terms, or because it costs too much to work, or because there is a local political debate and control of the council changes to a party or parties that do not agree with it. That is what local democracy is all about, and a local authority ought to have the ability to close down a scheme if it so decides. I therefore propose that a scheme must be voluntary and that it can be closed down or amended at any time to better suit local conditions. I beg to move.