---

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 66: 66: After Clause 234, insert the following new Clause— ““Payments on loss of office Payments on ceasing to hold office as mayor, leader or cabinet member (1) After section 100 of the Local Government Act 2000 (c. 22) (power to make provision about allowances) insert— ““100A Payments on ceasing to hold office (1) A local authority may establish and administer such schemes as they may from time to time determine for the making of payments to or in respect of persons on their ceasing, because of their failure to be re-elected as a councillor, to hold office as— (a) an elected mayor of the authority (within the meaning given by section 39); (b) an executive leader of the authority (within the meaning of Part II); or (c) a councillor of the authority appointed to the executive of the authority. (2) The power conferred by subsection (1) above includes power to make different provision for different cases. (3) A local authority’s functions under subsection (1) above are not to be exercised by the executive of the local authority. (4) The standing orders of every local authority must include provision for the publication of every determination under this section. (5) A determination under this section does not affect benefits in payment under this section before the making of the determination. (6) In this section, ““local authority”” has the same meaning as in Part II.””. (2) In consequence of the amendments made by this section, the italic heading preceding section 99 of the Local Government Act 2000 becomes ““Allowances, pensions and other payments””.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, the whole House will have waited all day for this speech, because this is the last amendment. Goodbye, Freddy. I apologise to the House and to the Minister for having tabled this important amendment very late in the proceedings. I was prompted to do so after discussions with London Councils. The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin, and I are, of course, joint presidents of that association. One aspect in which the Bill is deficient is in the treatment of full-time local councillors who are not re-elected and who consequently suffer financially. The amendment seeks to rectify this situation by granting local authorities powers to award compensation payments to full-time local authority councillors who are not re-elected to the council. I served as a councillor many years ago when not a breath of payment was made. Progress has been made since. Councillors deserve treatment equal to that of other full-time politicians. MPs receive compensation payments if they are not re-elected to the House of Commons. As a result of powers to be granted under the Greater London Authority Bill, which is shortly to become an Act, the Mayor of London and London Assembly members will also receive compensation on ceasing to hold office. It is inequitable that although MPs, the Mayor of London and London Assembly members receive these payments, full-time local authority councillors are treated differently. The amendment is not a case of councillors attempting to award themselves more money across the board. It would apply only to a limited number of local authority members in a limited number of situations. It would apply only to directly elected mayors, cabinet members and the leader of the council. It would apply only if they stood for re-election and were not voted back on to the council. It would not apply to other councillors and could be agreed only by the full council. It would be for local authorities to decide whether they wanted to institute these payments. They would not be obliged to do so. With these limitations, the amendment is reasonable and fair, and would allow each authority to decide for itself. Last year, an independent report entitled The Remuneration of Councillors in London concluded that there is a clear need for the law to be changed in this regard. I beg to move.