Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I shall speak also to Amendments 176C, 176D, 176E and 180C. The clause concerns the examination in public of the regional strategy. I have again gone back to the 2004 Act, which deals with regional spatial strategies. The first of the amendments would insert into Clause 70(2), which deals with the decision whether to arrange for an examination in public, the need to have regard to, "““the extent and nature of the consultation on the draft revision before it was published””." They are not original words; I have taken them directly from Section 7. On the other hand, Amendment 176C proposes deleting Clause 70(2)(b) as one of the matters to which regard must be had. The words in that paragraph are, "““the level of interest shown in the draft revision””." That, of course, is important, but it is not the whole of it by any means. Interest is often aroused, or at any rate manifests itself at a relatively late stage—planning seems to be particularly prone to this. If interest is not shown in the draft, it does not mean that interest will not be shown in the final document. Amendment 176D has been tabled because I am concerned—this will come out in other amendments—about the possible tensions between the component parts of the responsible regional authorities. The amendment states that if there is a disagreement as to whether or not there should be an examination in public, reviews of the leaders’ board shall prevail, because I have a natural instinct to support the local authority component, and it is possible that that component may see more benefit in a public examination than a regional development agency that is made up substantially of individuals whose backgrounds are not in the public sector and who tend to view these matters a bit differently. I confess that it is almost inconceivable, if there is some difference, that it will not have been tested publicly, but I want to understand what happens if there is tension. Amendment 176E makes essentially the same point as Amendment 176B, and Amendment 180C changes a ““may”” to a ““must”” in Clause 73, relating to the reserve powers of the Secretary of State. If the responsible regional authorities do not move on with the examination in public, the Secretary of State can; in that situation, it would not be proper for there not to be an examination in public. I beg to move.