Proceeding contribution from Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 30 June 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Localism Bill.
Localism Bill
My Lords, I am grateful to everyone who has taken part in this short debate and for what the Minister has said. While the question of a council being able to call a referendum under these provisions seems unnecessary and more in the way of detailed prescription, I understand that it is not a significant issue. The one significant issue that has come out of the debate is the question of whether individual members should be able to call referendums in their own wards. I just want to take the Committee through what the Bill says. Clause 45 is about a request for a referendum by members. It says that a request complies with this section if a member for a ward—or, if it is a multi-member ward, a majority of members for that ward or division—asks for that referendum. That is subject to Clause 46(2): "““The principal local authority must determine whether it is appropriate to hold a local referendum in response to the petition or request””." That is the point that the noble Earl, Lord Cathcart, made. But Clause 47, which we will come onto in some detail in the later group, clearly says in subsection (1): "““A principal local authority may only determine that it is not appropriate to hold a local referendum in response to a petition or request””—" and that request is a member request— "““on one or more of the following grounds””." The way in which the local authority, the council, treats a member request as far as grounds for determination—that is, deciding whether it can go ahead—is exactly the same as if a petition is received. We will discuss some of the stuff in Clause 47 a little later but the point is that, if it complies, the council does not have any discretion. It still has to make a formal decision but that decision is whether it complies. If it does, the referendum goes ahead. In an absolute way, the case made by the noble Earl, Lord Cathcart, is not what it says in the Bill. If I am wrong, this is a crucial issue that needs to be settled and sorted out. On that basis, and the basis that more discussion has to take place about member-requested referendums, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 120B withdrawn. Amendment 120C not moved. Clause 42, as amended, agreed. Clause 43 : Petition for local referendum Amendment 120D Clause 43 : Petition for local referendum Amendment 120D Moved by
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 728 c1911-2
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Community development Costs Council tax Increases Local government Planning Public consultation Publicity Referendums Parish and town councils Petitions
- Legislation
- Localism Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-22 18:39:08 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_755571
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_755571
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_755571