| Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill
|
|
Mr. Hammond: The reason is that the money is incremental. The function is currently being discharged by authorities and bodies. I do not see any provision for clawback of money from them, so the Government are proposing additional public expenditure, and Parliament should be able to scrutinise that. Column Number: 321 Mr. Raynsford: As the hon. Gentleman will know, there is already a regional dimension to the planning process. The development of the policies that are being debated in the Chamber at this very moment involves the functions under discussion being regularised, with regional spatial strategies being prepared by each region. Clearly, that will be the responsibility of the elected regional assemblies where they exist. Elsewhere, we believe that it is right that that should be the responsibility of the chamber. The Secretary of State's function is not a new one, as such. It is a rationalisation and part of the streamlining of the planning process, in order to help avoid the proliferation of tiers of planning that are a cause of the inherent delays in the planning process and have caused so much anxiety and frustration. Mr. Hammond: Let us be clear. When the Minister mentions the rationalisation of the process, he is saying that money is already financing the process. This is not a new process; it is ongoing, as he has said. The Minister proposes to give additional money to a new body to take over functions, but he does not propose to claw back any of the money that is currently being spent. In my book, the additional money is new money and it seems appropriate that Parliament should scrutinise the payment of it. Mr. Raynsford: I have no doubt that, had we not included this provision, we would have been accused by the Opposition of stealing money from county councils as part of a process of rationalisation. This is another classic case. This Opposition wish to attack us and, whatever we do, we cannot win. Our proposals are a sensible way of discharging the planning process efficiently and consistently, region by region. The Opposition's fears about county councils are greatly misplaced. We are trying to streamline the processes and create a more expeditious planning system than the present one. However, I will not stray into territory that is being debated on the Floor of the House. The resources will help the regional chambers, which, in every region, we intend to be the planning body, to carry out their important role in preparing revisions to regional spatial strategies. It is right that the power to pay grant should be made available to the Secretary of State without the need for an annual approval process; it is a relatively small amount of voted money. Mr. Hammond: How much money are we talking about? Mr. Raynsford: I cannot give a precise figure at the moment but I will write to the hon. Gentleman to give him the details. However, the sums are relatively small. They will be determined by colleagues who are responsible for the planning process. Amendment No. 86 would rule out grant being used for either a yes or no campaign in a referendum. Its effect would be similar to that of the existing funding agreements, which are issued to the regional chamber or its accountable body. Funding agreements contain a standard condition: Column Number: 322
It would be extremely unlikely for a chamber to publicise the case against an elected regional assembly, but, if it wished to do so, that would also be caught by the condition, as it refers to activities of a political nature. I entirely agree with the sentiment that underlies the amendment, but I cannot agree to the amendment because it is not necessary. Of course it would not be right for any regional chamber to use Government grant for political ends, such as promoting yes or no campaigns. That is why we have included that standard condition in the funding agreements. Mr. Stringer: As always, I am listening to the Minister with great interest; he is explaining things that I did not know before. Will he consider the case of the North West Regional Assembly? It seems to be campaigning for an elected assembly: writing in support of an elected assembly in the local press, and appearing on local media to say that elected assemblies are a good idea, is campaigning. As I understood the Minister, that is already prohibited. Mr. Raynsford: I was just about to talk about what we have already done in respect of the North East Assembly. I am happy to do exactly the same for the North West Regional Assembly. When the North East Assembly wrote to the Department for advice on using its grant to promote a yes campaign, we replied in the following terms:
I would be more than happy to write in similar terms to the North West Regional Assembly if my hon. Friend feels that that is necessary. However, I suspect that the assembly will already have been made aware of the terms of the agreement. Jim Knight: I hope that this point will not be regarded as mischievous. The Bill distinguishes between an interest in holding a referendum and an interest in a regional assembly. Would it be in order for a regional chamber to seek to generate interest in a referendum? Mr. Raynsford: That is a very good question. If regional chambers form the view that there is a large measure of interest in their region—no doubt there will be a response to our soundings—it would be perfectly proper for them to advocate the holding of a referendum. That would be subsequent to their assessment of the degree of interest in the region in having one. It would be perfectly reasonable. Explicit campaigning for a yes vote would be a political activity that fell foul of the restrictions. Mr. Stringer: I would like the Minister to give a specific answer to my question. Is arguing the case for an elected regional assembly outside the powers of the current regional assemblies? Column Number: 323 Mr. Raynsford: The point that I was making to my hon. Friend is that it would be inappropriate for assemblies to use Government grants that are made under the existing arrangements and which would be made under provisions in this part of the Bill for that purpose. If assemblies that are made up of bodies choose to use funds raised under different terms for such purposes, that is entirely a matter for them. However, we would not approve the use of grants—public money delivered by the Government for the purposes set out in our grant conditions—for political activities such as campaigning. That would be precluded on the basis that I outlined. Mr. Stringer: Are paid officials of the regional assembly allowed to write to local newspapers, talk to local media and say, ''We want a regional assembly''? Is that within their power? Mr. Raynsford: If such officials were paid from funds raised privately from sources other than public funds and they were carrying out the agreed policy of the regional assembly, they would not be acting improperly. We are debating the use of public funds made under specific grant to those bodies from the Government. We have made it clear that it would be improper for such funds to be used for the purposes described. I hope that that satisfies my hon. Friend. Mr. Hammond: In answering the question from the hon. Member for South Dorset (Jim Knight), the Minister suggested that campaigning for a referendum would be an acceptable use of public funds, but campaigning for a particular outcome once a referendum campaign was under way would not. I draw the Minister's attention to amendment No. 86, which is deliberately phrased to prevent both. In seeking to suggest that amendment No. 86 is redundant, the Minister has demonstrated only half that. He has satisfied me that it is the Government's intention, at least, that the use of such funds should not be allowed during a referendum campaign. However, he appears to be telling the hon. Member for South Dorset that it is acceptable to use them for campaigning for a referendum. Mr. Raynsford: Let me make it clear that the main purpose of such funds is to enable the chambers—or assemblies, as they are often called—to carry out their principal functions, which are to oversee the work of the regional development agencies and to undertake appropriate activities to help with the analysis of how the region can improve its economic performance and other related activities. Those are the principal functions. In the course of the soundings that are going on at the moment, if the chamber or assembly forms a view that there is a real interest within its region in having a referendum on whether there should be an elected regional assembly, it will be perfectly proper to bring that to the attention of the Government. That would not be campaigning for one outcome. I do not envisage that much expenditure would be involved, but, for the sake of clarity, the chamber would have a role to play. We have consulted chambers along with Members of Parliament, Members of the European Parliament Column Number: 324 and others. We seek the views of all representative bodies in the region, and it would be perfectly proper for the assembly to form a view on the degree of interest in a referendum and to make that view known to us. That would not conflict with the principal objection, which is to the use of public money for political campaigning. I hope that the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge understands the distinction.
6.45 pm
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2002 | Prepared 17 December 2002 |
