Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

The noble Lord, Lord Greaves, has probed the meaning of ““local people”” quite extensively with these amendments. I agree that the definition is curious. It is restrictive but nebulous. The noble Lord, Lord Greaves, is right to question how we define ““live””. How much of the year must a person spend in his home to qualify? Is it six months and a day or all the year round? What about owners of second homes? I am sure many Members of the Committee will have something to say about how they would be defined because of where they live most of the week. What about people who own property but do not live in it for whatever reason? Are they included or excluded? The noble Lord made other suggestions about people whose connection with an authority is just as substantial as those who are covered in the Bill. It seems that anyone with a connection to the services provided by a local authority could be said to have a sufficient local connection to warrant inclusion. A person who studies occasionally in a local authority’s area may have less interest in the working and functions of that authority than someone who regularly uses the service that the authority provides, even though he may live elsewhere. It could be argued that someone who chooses not to participate in the life and prosperity of a local authority does not need to have the local authority dutifully promoting itself to them. These are not arguments that I wish to pursue to a ridiculous degree because the Government could get themselves out of the tangle of definitions of who must be considered as a local person simply by removing the duty.