---

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 145A: 145A: Clause 82, page 57, line 23, at end insert— ““( ) The appointment of a person as an appointed councillor shall be made by a resolution of the council and a resolution of confirmation by the annual parish meeting. ( ) The term of office of an appointed councillor shall be for one year and will be renewable up to a maximum of four annual terms.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment pursues slightly further the question of appointed members of parish councils. Noble Lords will remember that we discussed this at some length in Committee and had some useful clarification of what an appointed member is, as opposed to an elected member or a co-opted member appointed to fill a vacancy that had not been filled in an election. Some noble Lords expressed grave doubts about appointed councillors and whether appointing members to any elected body in a democracy was the way we should go. A further amendment from my noble friend Lady Scott would do away with the whole thing, which I will support because the provision is wrong in principle. However, if we are going to have appointed members, it is important that they are closely constrained. We learnt in Committee that only one, two or at the most three members could be appointed. You could not appoint half the council, change the political composition of the council or build up an unassailable majority on larger councils which have political representation. The Minister wrote to us to explain that the appointment of an appointed councillor probably would be for one year under the regulations. The second part of the amendment states: "““The term of office of an appointed councillor shall be for one year and will be renewable up to a maximum of four annual terms””." The period of four years is deliberate. A parish council is elected for four years, at the end of which anyone who has been appointed can stand for election. While there might be value in having expertise on a parish council, at the end of that period they should stand for election like everyone else and not just expect to be appointed again without further ado or having to ask the people for their support. The first part of the amendment states that an appointment of a member should be subject to, "““confirmation by the annual parish meeting””." During our discussions in Committee on parish councils, I got the impression that the Government do not really understand annual parish meetings. They are not just public meetings called by parish councils. They are an integral part of local government at parish level and have specific powers, including receiving information from the parish council, receiving accounts and so on. Even if the Government, or legislation, allow appointment to a council, it should be subject to the minimal democratic endorsement of the parish meeting which has to take place each year. It is a statutory meeting consisting of local government electors in the parish who turn up at the meeting. Clearly, if a parish were to make a highly controversial appointment, it is likely that a lot of people would turn up to discuss it. Most annual parish meetings are not controversial and are not well attended, but occasionally they are. If someone wants to build a bypass through a village, 200 people could attend the annual parish meeting. That is how it works. Because the annual meeting exists as part of the system, the whole process of appointing someone to an elected position or a position which would otherwise be elected is unusual, to put it mildly. It should be subject to that minimal democratic authorisation. I beg to move.