Proceeding contribution from Lord King of Bridgwater (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 29 November 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Public Bodies Bill [HL].
Public Bodies Bill [HL]
My Lords, I support the noble Baroness in speaking for the south-west, although I do not regard her as being in the south-west at all. That is one of the problems of the south-west region. She rightly identified that certain parts of the south-west, such as Cornwall, have a different category status. I had the responsibility at one time of proposing the abolition of the metropolitan county councils. There is a certain déjà vu about some of the arguments that are coming out in this debate. People at the time, for example, said that the councils were indispensable—mainly the people who served on them. With regard to the major cities, I remember going to Birmingham and being berated by both the Conservative and Labour leaders of Birmingham City Council about the uselessness of the West Midlands County Council. I noticed that, with the exception of the GLC, hardly anyone stayed up late to observe the funeral obsequies of the metropolitan country councils. Amendment 16 is a very good idea. There are all sorts of good ideas that can be added to a Bill to complicate the issue. I do not know if he did it intentionally but the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, explained why it is not actually a very good idea, because the areas in question are all different when you are trying to lay down a particular requirement that applies to all the bodies that may now appear to take the place of the RDAs. London, the south-east and the south-west are quite different, while it is true that the north-east has problems of its own. There is always a temptation—we have been in opposition ourselves—to add all sorts of amendments and requirements. Amendment 16 is a good idea and it would be a very silly Government who did not observe the points that it makes where it is sensible to do so. However, it is not inevitably bound to be the right thing to do. In this case I would not support Amendment 16; it may be the right thing to do in almost all cases but not in every one, and no further complications should be added to the Bill.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 722 c1316
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Devolved matters Accountability Administration of justice Assets Business Closures Environment Hazardous substances Food Standards Agency Local government Ministerial powers Property transfer Public bodies Pesticides Ombudsman Non-departmental public bodies National parks Scotland Tribunals Sustainable development Wales Regional development agencies Advisory Committee on Pesticides Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council Local enterprise partnerships Advisory Committee on Hazardous Substances
- Legislation
- Public Bodies Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 19:34:19 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_686687
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_686687
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_686687