My Lords, this order was laid before the House on 24 June 2014. It expands the descriptions of information about which the Secretary of State may require authorities to publish information more frequently than annually. On 1 May, under Section 2 of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980, the Secretary of State issued a code of recommended practice on the publication of information by local authorities—the Local Government Transparency Code 2014. It is the Government’s intention to make it a legal requirement for local authorities to comply with Part 2 of that code, and this will include a requirement to publish on a quarterly basis information about their spending and the contracts they enter into.
However, the Secretary of State may require authorities to publish information on occasions recurring more than once a year only if the information falls within a description of information to which Section 3(4) of the 1980 Act applies. In short, legislation needs to set out which categories of information the Secretary of State can require to be published more frequently than annually. Therefore, this order adds to the descriptions of information about which the Secretary of State may require authorities in England to publish information
more than once a year—namely, information about any expenditure incurred by authorities, including expenditure exceeding £500 and government procurement card transactions, any legally enforceable agreement entered into by authorities and any invitations to tender for such agreements.
The average band D council tax payer gives their local authority £122 a month. Hard-working taxpayers deserve excellent services that meet their needs. They have a right to know how their hard-earned money is spent and how their services are delivered. They also have the right to ensure that their council is getting the best deals, to make every pound being spent work just a little harder. Taxpayers have a right to know what their council is doing. It is therefore reasonable to expect councils to publish all the information they hold unless there is a good reason not to do so, such as child protection or commercial sensitivities. Taxpayers should also be able to challenge councils in cases where they may be wasting money. That will act as an incentive to councils to keep looking at how they drive down their costs.
This is not just a whim. Since the Government took office, we have reversed several centralisation measures of the previous Administration. We have given unprecedented control to councils and local people for the delivery of local services. The code is another step on this journey. Local people want their council to publish key information. For example, Bedford’s citizens panel survey showed that 64% of respondents thought it was very important that the council makes data available to the public. Over half of respondents said that they were most interested in seeing data made available about council spending and budgets.
5 pm
A Local Government Association transparency survey found that more than half of the respondents cited local decision-making and democracy as a benefit of publishing open data. Research by Ipsos MORI has found that the more citizens feel informed, the more they tend to be satisfied with public services and their local authorities. But the performance of councils up and down the country is still too patchy. While some are embracing the importance of transparency and giving local people the information they want, others still have a way to go or their performance has tailed off. The LGA’s survey found that of 113 respondents, only half published contract information in line with the then voluntary recommended transparency code. Earlier this year, the Press Association found that a number of local authorities were not publishing timely spending data.
We should not, therefore, be surprised that councils struggle with all this. They spent too long having to deal with central targets set by the last Administration: having to send the Government data on thousands of performance indicators and to prepare for constant inspections. We have got rid of all that waste. Local authorities now need to make sure that they are accountable to those who matter most—local people.
The order is the culmination of over three years’ experience of local authorities implementing a recommended transparency code. I have seen the scrutiny committee’s report about this order. It is never the
department’s intention to mislead Parliament and I do not believe that we have done so in this instance. I assure noble Lords that we have consulted three times about local government transparency. During our second consultation, 91 respondents said that it was unnecessary for the Government to regulate to make it a requirement for local authorities to publish certain information. In effect, that means that 58%—219 respondents—did not, in fact, object to that regulation. During the most recent consultation, the Government made absolutely clear their intention to regulate and to require the quarterly publication of certain information. Nobody questioned the Government’s intention to require councils to publish quarterly data about their spending and the contracts they sign. Indeed, some respondents told us that they would go further, with monthly publication.
I believe that I have outlined the reasons behind this order and I beg to move.