Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I declare my interest as president of the Local Government Association. It may be worth reminding ourselves what the representative bodies of local authority government say about this—the LGA and the LGIU, to which some of us are indebted, because it services the All-Party Parliamentary Local Government Group. These bodies representing local government are fairly clear on their position; they are not opposed to, and in principle support, a new duty on local authorities of a kind envisaged by this Bill. However, they are very anxious about this becoming prescriptive and about the already good examples of local authorities doing their own thing very well being hampered by central government having clear ideas that it must be done in particular ways. The response to the question, ““Why bother?””—why bother that central government has put a duty of this kind into a Bill?—can be both negative and positive. The positive response is that it sends out a signal to local authorities that this is a more than respectable thing to spend your time and your ratepayers’ money on. It is important that local government takes seriously the issue of empowering local people and promoting democracy. It gives a licence to people to get on with it and to fend off objection from those who ask, ““Why are they spending our money, telling us how we should be better represented locally? What’s all this publicity and campaigning on behalf of empowerment?””. The Bill places a duty on local authorities, giving them a positive backdrop in taking the matter seriously and spending money on it. It also says to them, ““If you are not sure of the ways in which this may happen, listen to the Improvement and Development Agency and to organisations such as the LGA which is producing good advice and trying to share good experience across councils. Listen, and take notice and an interest in this whole issue. The negative side is that you may need fall-back powers for that tiny minority who always let the side down””. Whatever it is one wants local government to do, the majority get on with it sometimes more speedily and in a more exciting way, but one or two laggards are left behind. By giving local authorities a duty to get on with something that a handful will never get around to merely puts power into the hands of central government when needed. The overarching message is that if there is acceptance in principle from the local authority representative bodies, so also is there a fear that central government may take a good thing too far and get immersed in some of the detail, which would be very counterproductive.