---

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her third reply on this subject. Unfortunately, every time we discuss this another point is raised. I will challenge the Minister a bit on this. As I understand her, if we do not take the invitations out and we leave the provision as it is, local authorities will come to the Government and say that they want to form unitaries and not the other way around. That is not what the legislation says. The legislation says: "““Where invitations or directions under section 2 are given””." ““Under section 2”” is a direction from the Government. All of Clause 3 is about an initiation by the Government; either an invitation or a direction. We are all very clear that a direction will cease on 25 January 2008. With respect, I do not think that the legislation does what the Minister says it does. It may be that local authorities can come to the Government and say that they would like to form a unitary, in which case the Government can say, ““All right, in that case we will issue an invitation””. That is not what the legislation says. It will have to be turned round in some way. Confusion exists over the word ““invitation”” and it leaves a very open-ended situation, which has already caused enormous angst among the elements of the new unitaries. We have already had one judicial review, and it is not certain that there will not be more. It is certainly not clear that in the proposed unitaries there is unanimity between the districts or on the county councils, where proposals are being put forward. We ought to see an end to this part of the legislation. I beg leave to test the opinion of the House. On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 1) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 84; Not-Contents, 178. Clause 33 [Resolution for whole-council elections: requirements]: