Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hanningfield (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 5 July 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.


Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 3: 3: Clause 2, page 2, line 9, leave out paragraph (c) The noble Lord said: Amendments No. 3 to 8 would delete this so-called type C category of proposal, which would enable unitaries to go across areas crossing county boundaries. My noble friend Baroness Hanham made a good case for resisting the general process in her previous amendment, but crossing county boundaries and forcing people to be counted as part of a different county from the one with which they identify is deeply controversial. The central problem with type C proposals is that reorganisation across county boundaries risks totally undermining public consent for anything going ahead through those authorities. Incidentally, if the Minister were to accept our amendment on holding referendums, that might not be a problem, but we will come to that later. Whatever happens on this, the question of public consent is important; it is vital that people identify with the area where they live. We talked about communities in Amendment No. 1. Constituency boundaries, which affect and concern MPs, might change every few years, but I know of none that goes across counties. I am sure that the Minister will comment on this controversial issue. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
693 c1156 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Community development Devolution Local government Local government finance Non-departmental public bodies Improvement and Development Agency for Local Government
Legislation
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk