Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Shutt of Greetland (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 5 July 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Localism Bill.


Localism Bill

My Lords, I believe that is the case. I do not see that that should be disturbed by anything that the Bill is doing. The noble Lord talked about it the other way round, saying that sometimes district councils try to offload and the parish says, ““No, we would sooner you kept doing this””. I do not see that there is any reason why that cannot be done under present arrangements. The right to challenge is a different principle. There is a risk that this amendment could catch relevant authorities in an endless and burdensome cycle of considering requests and counter-requests from different parish councils in their area that have different ideas and preferences as to how services should be run. Finally, the amendment would risk cutting across the community right to challenge as a whole. Requests from parish councils to provide services differently, which might include the service being provided by the parish council or by another organisation, would potentially override expressions of interest from other relevant bodies. I hope that in the circumstances the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c195-6 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Community interest companies Community development Assets Business Buildings Council tax County councils Employment Land Expenditure Increases District councils Local government Property transfer Planning Public bodies Business rates Referendums Procurement Local government services Parish and town councils Provident societies Voluntary organisations Sports Social enterprises
Legislation
Localism Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk