Clause
56
Extension
of power to certain parish
councils
Alistair
Burt:
I beg to move amendment No. 58, in
clause 56, page 42, line 3, leave
out ‘an eligible’ and insert
‘a’.
The
Chairman:
With this it will be convenient to discuss the
following amendments: No. 59, in
clause 56, page 42, line 4, leave
out subsection
(4).
No. 60, in
clause 57, page 42, line 11, leave
out ‘an eligible’ and insert
‘a’.
No.
61, in
clause 57, page 42, line 16, leave
out ‘an eligible’ and insert
‘a’.
No.
62, in
clause 57, page 42, line 17, leave
out ‘an eligible’ and insert
‘a’.
Alistair
Burt:
I am happy to move these amendments briefly in the
name of my hon. Friends. We will have an opportunity to talk more about
parishes in our next
sitting, so I shall not rehearse now a number of the issues that I want
to raise in relation to them, but shall confine myself to the
amendments.
The
purpose of the amendment is to widen the scope for the use of the power
to promote well-being. Instead of confining the power to eligible
councils, which are effectively those that will be designated under the
quality parish councils criteria, the amendment would extend the power
and give that opportunity to all councils. That is in line with our
general approach of being as permissive as possible in relation to the
devolved powers.
Although I support that
extension, I offer one caveat that bears on what I said about the
previous amendment. At the weekend, I had a meeting with all my parish
councils. I split them into two groups and I saw about two-thirds of
the 54 parish councils in my constituency. We had a good discussion
about the Bill and the various powers that it contains, and one of the
clearest messages that came out of the meeting was that although people
thoroughly enjoyed being part of the parish council, they were
concerned that over time, more and more responsibilities were coming
their way and they did not know whether they could find the people to
do the job.
I will
read two short quotes, the first of which is from Cardington parish
council, which said to me in a letter dated 8
January:
“Concern
was also expressed that at this time it is already difficult to get
people willing to volunteer to become Parish Councillors, the volume of
consultation documents that are received for comment, and with the
Local Authorities being penalised if they do not meet the Target Dates
for
responses.”
Stevington
parish council
said:
“The role
of the Council appears to be changing and both the Council and the
Clerk will inevitably have to take on more duties; we forsee difficulty
in encouraging residents to stand for the Parish Council in the future
if the role becomes more
onerous.”
I received a
number of other similar remarks. Those two comments can be taken to
represent them all.
The power to promote well-being
is incredibly widely drawn. The Local Government Act 2000 enables the
local authority to promote well-being where it considers it
will
“achieve any one or
more of the following
objects—
“(a)
the promotion or improvement of the economic well-being of their
area,
(b) the
promotion or improvement of the social well-being of their area,
and
(c) the promotion
or improvement of the environmental well-being of their
area.”
The various powers
that are available to a council that is granted such a power include
the power
to
“(a) incur
expenditure,
(b) give
financial assistance to any person,
(c) enter into arrangements or
agreements with any
person”
and so
on.
I hope that the
Under-Secretary can briefly give a sense of how she expects the powers
to be used by parish councils and why she feels they should be limited
by qualifying criteria. Will she also bear in mind that because the
powers will exist, and people will seek them, there is a danger that
parish councils are being given rather too much to do? Their original
purpose is changing and it is difficult to get the right
sense because we are caught in a trap. Many parish councils want greater
responsibility, but will the extension of powers and more
responsibility encourage anyone new to come on board and share the
burden with the small group of people who at present give a huge amount
of time to local affairs? We had an interesting discussion on the
matter with the parish councils and, by and large, the consensus was
that they did not think they would encourage new people. I was disappointed, because
members of the Committee are involved in the process of government and
it matters a lot to us. I am interested in the Under-Secretary’s
thinking on the promotion of well-being. How many councils does she
think will take up such a provision? Is she keen for it to be
permissive so that if a council wants to take a chance, will it be able
to do so rather than fulfilling the criteria of being an eligible
council and going down the quality parish council route?
Will the
Under-Secretary give us her view, to which we can return when we
discuss other provisions relating to parish councils? The growing
bureaucratisation of parish councils is not helping the process of
getting more people informally involved. They fear that their
involvement is no longer informal but getting more serious. That might
not encourage people to engage with local matters in the way that we
would like them to.
Angela
E. Smith:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He
shared with us some of the dilemmas of this issue, which we will
continue to address in the Committee. I will say something about the
reason for this clause being in the Bill and answer his questions in
that context.
The Bill
takes forward many of the White Paper’s commitments to empower
local government. We want to extend that philosophy to parish councils
by giving local people much more freedom in respect of well-being in
their own area. Parish councils already have a long list of specific
activities and powers and an additional power under section 137 of the
Local GovernmentAct 1972 to undertake actions that will bring
direct benefit. That power is limited at present, not least because
there is a ceiling on the amount of money per head that can be spent by
a parish on specific objectives. It is currently £5.54 per annum
per person.
Clause 56
will release some parish councils from those constraints and give them
additional powers to enable them to promote social, economic and
environmental well- being in their areas. Hon. Members will be aware
that district councils have that power under the Local Government Act
2000 and they must have regard to their own community strategies in
exercising that power. We did not want to place an additional burden on
parish councils and require them to develop their own community
strategies too. To avoid duplication of bureaucratisation, the Bill
says that they must have regard to those strategies prepared by a
higher-tier authority. We will not require the parish councils to get
into additional bureaucracy themselves. Many parishes anyway produce
their own local plans and local authorities are increasingly having
regard to local parish plans.
As the hon. Gentleman said, the
power of well-being is potentially a very broad power and we do not
seek to constrain it by placing statutory limits on eligible
parishes’ expenditure, but it would be prudent to have some
safeguards in place; the problem is how many there should be. Clearly,
not every parish council would have the right to the power of
well-being because the size of parish councils varies enormously and so
does the work they do, their ambitions and, indeed, their
competence.
We want
to ensure that those who want to use the new power have the capacity
and the competencies to do so and that is where the eligibility
criteria come in. The White Paper said that the criteria would be based
on the non-statutory quality parish scheme, which provides a good
starting point for thinking about the issues. However, I cannot give an
assurance that those criteria are automatically sufficient for what we
are seeking to do. As hon. Members may be aware, in the quality parish
councils scheme, a parish council must be able to demonstrate that it
is representative of, and actively engages with, all parts of the
community, providing vision, identity and a sense of belonging. It must
also demonstrate that it is effectively and properly managed, and has
the ability and capacity to take on the enhanced role and
responsibility that quality status is likely to
bring.
That
is a good starting point for development of the criteria that a parish
with power of well-being should have. A number of tests have already
been devised. They cover such matters as electoral mandate,
qualifications of the clerk of the council, the frequency and
administration of council meetings, communication, community and so
on.
The hon.
Gentleman made some probing comments about whether the Government are
seeking to put a duty or obligation on every parish council to have to
meet the criteria for power of well-being. We are not—that would
be too onerous for certain parish councils, and many would not want it.
We are not trying artificially to limit the number of parish councils
that could have a power of well-being, but we want to ensure that the
power is exercised sensibly and that the parish itself has the
competence and ability to exercise the power. The number of parishes
with quality parish status is fairly small—approximately 300.
That might increase, but not because of a drive to get higher numbers.
It will increase if councils want the power, and are sufficiently
competent to be given
it.
We have discussed
matters with the National Association of Local Councils, and the
association is broadly content with the Government’s position.
When we consider the precise criteria, we shall talk to the association
and to other stakeholders, including the LGA. In considering whether
the power of well-being should go further than the quality parish
scheme, we shall also explore whether, for example, the criteria should
address potential financial
implications.
We want
to devolve power so that local people can have greater influence on
services in their own local communities. We want councils to be able to
respond better to local circumstances. However, appropriate safeguards
have to be attached to devolution, both for the sake of the public and
of councillors. By providing suitable appropriate criteria, we can find
a way forward that is appropriate for all.
Alistair
Burt:
The Under-Secretary may not be able to answer now,
but let me put an idea in her mind. Parish councils might come forward
with a wish to take more powers, or powers that are outside the scope
of the power of well-being—especially in relation to planning.
They might say to the Government, “If you really want to devolve
powers to us that will involve our local community, can we have more
control over such and such an issue?”. Will the Government be
open to that
approach?
Angela
E. Smith:
Parish councils are statutory consultees of the
higher-tier authority. If that authority wanted the parish council to
take on such a role, it would have to ask it to do so, but the
Government have no plans to take planning responsibilities away from
the councils that currently have those responsibilities. The proposal
we are making is different. It is about a power to engage the local
community so that that community is at the heart of things. The power
of well-being can do that. It is not about putting more onerous duties
on parish councillors.
I am mindful of the hon.
Gentleman’s comments. They are helpful. Nevertheless, I ask him
to withdraw his amendment and to accept the Government’s
proposal.
Alistair
Burt:
I am grateful for the spirit in which the
Under-Secretary dealt with the amendment. I am pleased that we shall
have more opportunity to explore the issue of parish councils in later
sittings, because they are important and they provide a tremendously
valuable backbone to local administration in our communities. It will
be encouraging if we spend a bit more time on them at our next sitting.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the
amendment.
Amendment,
by leave,
withdrawn.
Clause
56 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause 57
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Further
consideration adjourned—[Jonathan
Shaw.]
Adjourned
accordingly at Eight o’clock till Thursday 22 February at
half-past Nine
o’clock.
| 
