May I say how nice it is to see you in the Chair, Mr Crausby?
I wish to raise my concern about the fact that we are approaching 7 o'clock and will hardly get halfway down the selection list. The time available is totally inadequate. Goodness knows what the Government were thinking about, giving us just three days in Committee. It is an absolute travesty. I only hope that they will give us at least one whole day, and possibly two, on Report to allow debate on many of the matters that have not been discussed in Committee.
If the House is to do justice to the Bill, we should at least get a chance to discuss some of the very important amendments that have been tabled. I see them not as wrecking amendments but as helpful, creative amendments that would show the Government the strength of feeling in the House. Legitimate concerns have been raised from both sides of the House on this group of amendments alone, and if I were the Minister leading the Bill I would like to give the House more time to discuss them properly. If we are not careful, we will end up with a dog's dinner, which cannot be right or fair to local authorities.
The most important issue in this group of amendments is raised in new clause 11, with which I agree entirely. It gets to the very essence of what the Committee has discussed on previous days. It is about the stability and sustainability of local government and its ability to stay clearly focused on its task. Support for new clause 11 is essential to give local authorities a fair chance of implementing the scheme.
The Government have expressed no clear and positive view about what they can do to help local authorities. I ask Ministers what is wrong with new clause 11 if they believe in fairness and in giving local authorities a proper opportunity to get the scheme right. Who will benefit if it is got wrong? No one, least of all the people who claim benefits. Most of the blame will fall on local authorities, and once again we are going down the well trodden path whereby the Government decide to disrobe themselves of their responsibilities and pass them off to local government, but forget to put the resources in place to help things happen.
I do not suppose that at the end of this debate the Minister will dish out to Members a scheme that has already been concocted, so that they can take it back to their local authorities and say, ““This is the scheme we want you to use. We've paid for it, we've got it in place, and all you've got to do is tweak it a little. It's tried and tested, and we're prepared to give it to you.”” That is not going to happen, is it?
Local Government Finance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mike Hancock
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 31 January 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Local Government Finance Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
539 c736-7 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:05:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_805321
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_805321
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_805321