Proceeding contribution from Dan Rogerson (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 February 2008. It occurred during Legislative debate on Local Government.
Local Government
My remarks are to be directed at the issue of time scales, and with that in mind I shall try to keep them brief. My party is very supportive of the concept of unitary local government where it is appropriate for the area concerned. However, the process that gets us towards that is crucial, and there are a number of issues that we need to bear in mind. The time scales imposed on this particular process have restricted local debate so that consultation has been rudimentary. I welcome the fact that some of the proposals have been discussed for a long time prior to the process, but the time scales set out under the provisions have restricted proper formal consultation. In many of the bidding processes that have already been debated in the House, one authority has been advancing one case, while another has been advancing another, and they have tended to do so in a self-interested way. As time is constrained, the process has not allowed for a more sensible debate, and people have retreated into silos, which is unfortunate. That is a feature of how the process has been set up. Many of the polls, referendums and consultations that have been undertaken have been seen to be flawed and called into question because they have had to be carried out rapidly and there were limitations on what could be achieved. The short period available to compile bids may lead to having hostages to fortune later on that come back to haunt the people tasked with implementing the bids, when they come to do so. We have also heard that the time scale has influenced some authorities to react to the response of other authorities; for example, a county council might bid, and districts might feel that they have to react in a certain way. That is another feature of the time-scale constraints placed on the process. What will happen if the order is passed? In contrast with some other areas, including my own area of Cornwall, in Cheshire the proposal is for a shadow council to be elected, instead of having a period in which representatives of existing authorities come together to draw up how things will move forward. There are arguments for and against both those processes. Clearly, where officers are to be appointed, the shadow authority has the electoral mandate to be able to carry that out. However, with two very new authorities, the situation is different from that which pertains in other bid areas where existing authorities cover the area.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 472 c1051-2
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Local government Reorganisation Unitary councils Cheshire
- Legislation
- Cheshire (Structural Changes) Order 2008
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:54:11 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449188
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449188
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449188