---

Localism Bill

My Lords, of course I am extremely grateful for what my noble friend has said. As I have said in my opening remarks, she has been an outstanding listener on this Bill and the whole House recognises that and is very grateful. Of course, I accept her assurance as being absolutely something that one can rely on. I do not wish to trouble the scorers any longer: On this Bill I have troubled them almost as much as my noble friend Lord Newton of Braintree. I am grateful for the support of all noble Lords who spoke. There is a principle of concern here. The answer in brief to the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, who asked how we would get out of this problem, is ““What a pity we got into it””. Localism was going along very happily in many parts of the country until the Government came along, plonked down a Bill and said: ““This is how you do localism, boys and girls””. I drafted my amendment to try to give content and relief to the Secretary of State, who seemed to want to designate a system to allow him at least to take a view on whether what was going on was satisfactory. I would rather an alternative to a back-stop power. I have always thought that a problem in many sections of the Bill is that a back-stop piece of legislation that should have guaranteed certain rights has become potentially all-embracing. I am not trying to push the Secretary of State into anything: it is a way of trying to find a solution. The Secretary of State has already come into the question. Without further ado, I again thank my noble friend for what she said, thank other noble Lords who spoke and express the hope that we can find a solution to what other noble Lords have agreed is a real conundrum. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 205 withdrawn. Amendment 205ZZA Moved by