Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I shall give the noble Lord the answer that I would have given. This is the proposition that the leaders’ board must approve the regional strategy. We will come on to a discussion of the powers of the Secretary of State, how they are positioned in the Bill and why they are there. We have established a model in the Bill, based on extensive consultation over the past two years. The leaders’ board and RDA must jointly agree a draft regional strategy, which then has to be approved by the Secretary of State. In practice, the RDA and leaders’ board each have a joint veto because they each have to agree with each other. The amendment would give the leaders’ board a veto over the Secretary of State if they chose not to approve the strategy with amendments from the Secretary of State. As I will say later, however, the Secretary of State has a responsibility to ensure that the regional strategies in place reflect regional priorities but are in line with national government policy and deliverable—for example, that they reflect the resources available. Ultimately, if something is not deliverable, it is meaningless and there is no point in having a ““strategy””. If the amendment is included, therefore, there is a high risk of regional strategies simply ending in deadlock. We cannot afford that situation, which this arrangement is designed to avoid. On the important point of consultation, Amendment 165B requires the responsible regional authorities to consult all local authorities in a region before establishing the regional strategy. Amendment 175B, which, again, has not been spoken to, but which I shall address—