---

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 147: 147: Clause 83, page 58, line 8, leave out ““an eligible”” and insert ““a”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving the amendment, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 148 to 151. They are intended to raise again the issue of whether all parishes should be given power to promote well-being. This matter was raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, at the previous stage. All the amendments delete the term ““eligible”” and the definition of an eligible authority or parish council—““eligible”” meaning a council that, "““meets the conditions prescribed by the Secretary of State””." The Minister explained what was meant by eligibility and the purpose of these amendments is to seek further information on that. She explained that eligibility would be based on the non-statutory quality parish scheme. She said that it, "““provides for tests of criteria for electoral mandate; qualifications of the clerk””—" and various other matters— "““proper accountability; and an ethical framework””." I want to ask her about two of those items and to make a general point. First, what is meant by ““proper accountability”” in this context? We have democratic elections. Is this something to do with the manner in which meetings are held? What scope is there for a parish not being properly accountable within the terms of its constitution? Secondly, I had not understood that the ethical framework was optional; therefore, where does it fit in as regards meeting the test of eligibility. She ended by saying that, "““it is definitely not about arbitrarily limiting the number of parish councils that can use the well-being power. It is simply about ensuring that these powers are exercised sensibly””.—[Official Report, 11/7/07; col. 1489.]" Can the Minister tell the House what is meant by ““exercising powers sensibly”” or, conversely, what would constitute ““non-sensically”” or ““non-sensibly”” or whatever? It sounds as though I am making light of this; I am not. I should like to understand whether the tests which are to be applied and which will be the basis of the Secretary of State’s direction are capable of objective assessment or whether they are tests that might be thought to be exercised subjectively. I beg to move.