My Lords, first, I thank the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, for his broad support for what the Government are seeking to do. Although I totally accept that it is important that we debate the detail, I think that all Members of your Lordships’ House believe that increased transparency at local authority level is a positive thing. That is certainly the intention behind the order.
Perhaps I may pick up on a few of the themes and some of the specific questions. First, I make it clear that the department is working very closely with the LGA and local e-government standards bodies to prepare advice for local authorities on how to meet their obligations under the code. In this regard, as the noble Lord may know, we have already published a “frequently asked questions” document alongside the code, which provides answers to questions raised. Moreover, my department is also working with the Information Commissioner’s Office to ensure that the model publications scheme definition document and guidance are also aligned, as far as possible, with the code.
5.15 pm
The noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, suggested that, although the Government have driven localism, this perhaps goes against the grain. I cannot agree with him. Local authorities will not be reporting to Whitehall but will be more accountable to local people. As I said in my introduction, this is about local authorities publishing data so that local people can hold them to account for their decisions. Transparency, as I am sure the noble Lord will acknowledge, will improve democratic accountability and bring about greater efficiency gains, through both service reform and increased competition.
On data share, Redbridge, for example, provides a vehicle to present data online in an open format that people can read and use. It also provides data in graphical formats which allow the public to interrogate data against their own criteria; submit their own idea for data that should be published; and allows data to be linked between data sets. As a market-leading project, data share has attracted government funding for its deployment to up to 100 local authorities already. Currently there are 230 data sets available to the public; there are 80,000 registered users; there are more than 1,000 visits per month; data sets are interrogated more than 1,500 times a month; and 1,700 data sets have been downloaded over the past six months.
It is important that we move forward because some local authorities are not sharing the information that they should be. There are examples around the country of local authorities which have not published expenditure information for more than a year. In terms of use, there is an organisation called Spend Network which captures the data on spending and allows people to compare the patterns of their authority with others. I have already provided the example of Redbridge.
The noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, asked about the date of implementation. Once this order is in force it is our intention to lay the regulation to make the code mandatory as soon as possible. He also asked whether the annual data will be included quarterly. We have no plans to extend the information currently required, which I detailed in my opening remarks, to a quarterly basis. The noble Lord suggested that this is an extra burden on local authorities. In our assessment of new burdens, the publication of the mandatory requirements is within the code. It was derived after discussions with local authorities—not excluding them—and the LGA.
On enforcement, the Information Commissioner’s Office will not monitor compliance with the code. It will react to complaints from the public under existing frameworks—the Freedom of Information Act and the environment regulations—to ensure that authorities fulfil their obligations. Let me make it clear that anyone can make a complaint to the monitoring officer of the local authority and remind it of its duty. The public can use local authorities’ complaints procedures, and it will be possible to make a complaint to the local government ombudsman where other local authority complaint procedures have been exhausted. The authority could, of course, become subject to judicial review, and the public can make freedom of information requests.
The noble Lord also asked about thresholds and the £5,000. We understand local authorities’ concerns about burdens. However, the Government want to open up local markets and increase competition for
contracts, particularly among SMEs and the voluntary sector, and think that a lower threshold will increase opportunities for smaller enterprises, which are likely to be the type of organisations that might be attracted to compete for smaller contracts at a local government level.
The noble Lord asked specific questions about the best value portfolio and, if I may, I shall write to him in that regard.