Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 17 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL].


Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

My Lords, I have one substantive point to make, but in fact this entire clause ought to be removed. The suggestion that petitions with a higher threshold would have a status that enabled the petition organiser to require a debate in full council is not appropriate. Different councils debate things and do things in different ways. For example, in some councils, the appropriate place to discuss a petition is the area committee and taking the petition to the full council would not be appropriate if it is about something that occurs in a specific area, therefore the procedure under this legislation would probably be contrary to the council’s standing orders. The question of how petitions are dealt with and which body should debate them should be subject to local flexibility depending on the interests of the petitioners and the particular structures and institutions of a council. For example, in a large county council, people may want a petition to be debated in one of its area committees. Again I refer to my own county of Lancashire. People might not want a petition to be debated at a full county council meeting in Preston that might not happen for another two or three months when it could be debated at one of the Lancashire locals. These are joint committees of the county and the district which exist in each of the districts. That is just one example of what might be a more appropriate structure for debating the petition. Once again the Government are trying to put all councils into the same straitjacket. They have been doing it for over 10 years and it is not something we approve of, but in this instance it is not a sensible proposal. Most councils have a procedure whereby members of the council can put down motions to full council. In some it may require just one councillor, but in others it may need two, three or four councillors. However, by and large, the procedure by which a matter can be debated in full council is by one councillor proposing it. That is the normal, democratic procedure and a councillor representing an area and its residents can do that. It would not be appropriate to have some kind of system which bypasses the normal council structures. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c209-10 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Conditions of employment Disadvantaged Councillors Equality Hospitals Licensing Governing bodies Information Local government NHS Pay Public appointments Planning Prisons Public bodies Public consultation Publicity Local government services Public participation Monitoring Magistrates Political impartiality Standards Schools Local courts boards Youth offending teams e-petitions Petitions
Legislation
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill (HL) 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk