My Lords, this group of amendments in my name and that of my noble friend Lady Hayman goes to the heart of the Bill and its levelling-up missions by attempting to strengthen a range of provisions that refer to regional disparities.
8.15 pm
We heard earlier in the debate about health inequalities and child poverty. The UK has one of the highest levels of income inequality in Europe: disposable income inequality increased to 35.7% in the last financial year. Areas affected by those inequalities, as we all know, suffer from poorer health, higher mortality rates, lower educational attainment and higher crime levels. We had much discussion on that in Committee, so it is not our intention to labour points already covered—but we remain concerned about the areas covered in these amendments. Despite the significant chapter setting out the background to regional disparities in the levelling up White Paper, there is still not enough in the Bill to ensure that they are being tackled, measured and monitored in a way that is meaningful and will ensure that the changes we all want to see are implemented.
Amendments 19 and 274 will place a key duty on the Secretary of State to monitor and report on disparities in the cost of living between regions. It is these disparities that can help determine where further support needs to go. We all know that regional disparities are not straightforward because, for example, where housing costs are extremely high the fact that wages may be higher than in other areas is wiped out.
Amendments 20 and 285 establish an independent board for the assessment of geographical disparities in England, which we believe will bring focus, independence and rigour to the determination and monitoring of metrics in this area.
Amendment 22 simply asks that the Government consider the impact of geographical disparities at a more granular level than is often done. Local authorities operate in areas where there can be significant disparities even between wards. For example, there is a seven-year life expectancy difference between one of our wards in Stevenage, where I live, and another. Consideration needs to be given to this when levelling-up funding mechanisms are considered.
Tackling disparities wherever they occur must surely be the fundamental part of levelling up. Too often, the levelling-up funding awards have been a bit of a blunt instrument which assume that, because one area has a level of deprivation different from another, the second area does not need any support at all in relation to levelling up. I beg to move.