---

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

My Lords, when the reference to a Maoist Government was made, I wrote down, ““Maoist—don’t shoot the messenger””. Perhaps I should not defend the Minister’s remarks in that way. Interesting points have been made. There might be a role for children’s services south, for instance. There might certainly be the non-portfolio roles to which my noble friend has referred. The point is that we should not be standing in SW1, attempting to design what goes on in—I have no idea what the postcode for Wigan might be—other parts of the country. The noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, said that it was too soon to be tinkering with the 2000 Act. That was rather where we on these Benches started when we opened this Bill. I think that we have lost that argument, or at least we are not going to persuade the Government of it. We do believe it is too soon. The noble Lord also suggested that there might be all sorts of reasons for increasing the size of an executive. In Wigan I am sure that allowances would not be a reason to include people in an executive. I hope that that was not directed at anybody in this Chamber. There are sometimes good reasons in the management of a group to include people in a tent rather than to leave them outside. However, I am not making progress on this. I beg leave to withdraw amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 68 [Other elected executive members]: