Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I have to say that I do not know who writes the stuff for the Minister, but I was not terribly impressed with that. The amendment would add a great deal to the Bill. It would totally change the Bill. The Bill refers to, "““the managing or governing body of a maintained school in the principal local authority’s area””." That is pretty prescriptive. I am trying to turn it round to say: do not define it according to the bureaucratic boundaries and bureaucratic systems, which people may or may not understand; define it according to what people elect. Go to the people first to say, ““Which schools do you send your children to?””, or go to the children and the students at the FE college to say, ““Which schools do you go to?””. Ask people, ““Which hospital do you use?””. If the legislation is really about empowering citizens—to use some government language—start from the basis of the citizens, not from the basis of the bureaucratic structures. The noble Baroness, Lady Warsi, and the Minister both asked how councils would determine which things to include and how to define ““significant””. I would not define ““significant””. We do not have to define ““sustainable development”” whenever it appears in Bills; we are not allowed to. Let us not define it. Let us leave it to the common sense of the councils concerned. That is what the Government will not do. They will not let go. They will not say, ““Here, around the country, is a series of councils. If we treat them as sensible, intelligent people with common sense and trust them to do sensible things, by and large that is what they will do. If we try to tie them up in detailed prescriptive rules and regulations, they will behave less sensibly, because that is what people do””. The Minister referred to the ward that he opened at Airedale hospital. Sometimes I think that the debates that we have here are driving me mad. I hope that I will not have to take advantage of the excellent facilities that he was responsible for introducing. I do not know. If anyone goes to Barnoldswick and tries to issue a document telling people how to get involved in the health service but it is all about Burnley and Blackburn and does not mention Airedale, there will be a riot on the streets of that town. So Lancashire County Council and Pendle Borough Council, when producing such documentation, will say that it is common sense that they must include Airedale because they are local people and they know where people go. They do not have to spend money doing opinion surveys on where people go. We all know. That is what the Government do not seem to understand: people on the ground know these things and will do sensible and common-sense things. Finally, given the way in which the Bill is written—that the hospital has to be in the district—some districts probably do not have a hospital any more, so they would be missed out altogether. Is that what the Government want? The Minister said that information will be available at the school, the hospital, the college and so on. I begin to think that that undermines the whole basis of this part of the Bill. I am not satisfied with the answer.