| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Goodhart: My Lords, I am afraid that I shall take a little longer on this order than I did on the previous ones.
As I understand it, the information referred to in Section 20 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 concerns financial circumstances, with a view to obtaining legal aid. It seems to me that to maintain the restriction for 100 years is absurd. That means that we would just this year be disclosing information about the financial circumstances of someone living in 1904. I accept that the information should not be made immediately available, but I see no real reason why it should not be made available after the usual 30 years or at the most after, say, 50, which would take us back to 1954. I have great difficulty in seeing that any application for legal aid made in 1954 would be sensitive these days.
I want to raise a wider point. The annual report on the implementation of the Freedom of Information Act, published last month, states that 430 statutory provisions have been identified that restrict access to information and are being considered in the review process. The annual report states that 44 of those have already been repealed or replaced, and 37 have been agreed for repeal or amendment. The order repeals or amends eight of those 37. When, therefore, will the other 29 provisions in that group be repealed or amended?
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1036
The report states also that 247 statutory provisions are still under consideration. It is four years, of course, since the Freedom of Information Bill was enacted, and I wonder why it is that more than half of the reviews are not yet completed. Surely efforts should have been to ensure that they were completed by D-day—1 January 2005—when the right to obtain information under the Act comes into force. Can the Minister give us any indication of when the process is likely to be completed?
Lord Kingsland: My Lords, I should like to associate myself with the probing and pertinent questions posed by the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I am delighted that the noble Lord has associated himself with those questions because they are important. I shall endeavour to ensure that I answer them, particularly as noble Lords should know that I have responsibility in my department for freedom of information, which is an area in which I am deeply interested. I would commend the incredible amount of work that has been going on. However, enough of the fluff around the matter.
We have a general policy for certain kinds of information; that is, a 100-year rule. This fell within that general policy. I take the noble Lord's point that one can argue that what one did in 1954 or 1984 is neither here nor there, but the way in which we have approached this is by considering the position of individuals very carefully. We live longer and longer. Some Members of your Lordships' House—not those who are present, who are very young—are demonstrable proof of that. It is important that we have a really robust timescale. The order fits into that approach. It may not be the approach that noble Lords would like, but it is consistent. That is quite important. I am not sure how many requests there would be for that kind of information in any event, but it is about individuals—we have to be clear about that—and that is the principle to which we will be adhering.
The noble Lord was incredibly numerate in adding up the different statutory provisions. As I understand it, we are repealing as we go, looking carefully at the different statutes. The noble Lord is right that it is four years since the Act was introduced. There has been a huge amount of preparation. Some of that work has required a lot of consultation; some of that work has been taking place during the course of the last year, as we have moved closer and closer to the deadline. I make no apology for that, because that is how all organisations operate in thinking through what needs to be done. There will be further orders in 2005. I am confident that we are well placed for D-day. It is an important day. I am looking forward to working with colleagues and departments to make sure that we respond well. This order is all about better government, and we should all support it. On that basis, I hope that both noble Lords will feel able to support the order.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1037
West Northamptonshire Development Corporation (Area and Constitution) Order 2004
Lord Rooker rose to move, That the order laid before the House on 13 May be approved.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, if approved by this House and the other place, which is discussing this order today and indeed perhaps even as we speak, the order will establish an urban development area covering Northampton, Daventry and Towcester and an urban development corporation to regenerate that area. In February 2003, the Deputy Prime Minister announced the Sustainable Communities Plan. That is not a house-building programme, but a programme to develop communities that will stand the test of time and create places where people want to live. To make this happen, we are working with partners to establish fit-for-purpose, local delivery vehicles.
In west Northamptonshire, the four local authorities requested an urban development corporation to meet the challenges that they face. The development corporation will provide the focus, powers and capacity necessary to drive forward major new developments, secure private sector confidence and maximise investment. The urban development corporation will have a number of advantages over alternative delivery mechanisms: single-minded focus; direct access to government; its own financial "pot"; relevant statutory powers; expert staff; and the ability to take a long-term view. That is not to say that the other delivery vehicles, some of which are local authority led, are any less valuable. We are seeking to achieve merely what is fit for purpose for the particular locality. The advantages that I have listed will contribute to growth and investment that is better planned, more sustainable and better co-ordinated. Of course, that is in everybody's interests.
On 15 January, we consulted on proposals for the urban development corporation. Responses were received from individuals, the voluntary sector, the private sector, local authorities, non-governmental organisations and government agencies. The issues raised during the consultation have been examined at length by a Select Committee of your Lordships' House. I will save the House any further detailed explanation of the issues, but they were well addressed by the committee during a period of two weeks.
However, the committee highlighted a number of points that I will address. First, on consultation, the committee considered that greater effort could have been made to inform people of the urban development corporation proposals. I take that on board quite genuinely and the Government will certainly seek to ensure that that is the case if there are any other urban development corporations. We have no plans at present, but it is likely that as we develop the growth area agenda, there may be two or three—that may be too many—urban development corporations in addition to the four urban development corporations that have been set up so far. Two are in the Thames
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1038
Gateway; the third is technically a sub-committee of English Partnerships, but it is operating on a statutory basis on Milton Keynes to the same kind of rules. We would certainly make sure that the consultation is better and that the local authorities involved have carried out such a consultation. We will not accept a one-sentence line in a letter as being sufficient.
Secondly, the committee recommended that the urban development corporation consults not only within its boundaries. The west Northamptonshire urban development corporation is somewhat different from some corporations, although it is not unique. It represents the three districts of Northampton town, Daventry and Towcester. They are not coterminous, but three separate, isolated areas. Therefore, it is crucial that the surrounding area is taken into account in the consultation. I will ensure that the urban development corporation's guidance and targets reflect the request and desire of the Select Committee. That is wholly right and proper.
The committee sought a further undertaking regarding the membership of the urban development corporation. It recommended that the members of the proposed UDC should include: two members representing Northampton Borough Council; one member representing Daventry District Council; one member representing South Northamptonshire District Council—which of course contains Towcester—and two members representing Northamptonshire County Council. It further recommended that the two members from each of the Northampton councils should belong to different political groups. We are more than happy to ensure that.
Indeed, I wrote to the noble Lord, Lord Boston of Faversham, chairman of the Select Committee, on 10 November, to give that undertaking. I can now confirm it to the House. I should point out that all the places on the board will be filled on merit, in accordance with the guidance from the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments. In other words, we shall follow the Nolan rules for these appointments.
As noble Lords will know, the difference is that we originally proposed that only one member from each of the four councils should be included on the urban development corporation, but, having listened to the evidence, the Select Committee has obviously deemed that two members should represent each of the Northamptonshire councils. There will be other members, obviously, but there have been public advertisements and the posts will be filled on merit.
The urban development corporation provides Northampton, Towcester and Daventry the opportunity to derive maximum benefit from the growth which is coming anyway. They are not areas devoid of growth; the question is one of deriving the maximum benefit. The regeneration tasks facing the three towns are different, of course. I am very grateful to the Select Committee for taking the time to go and visit the area. However, the towns are intrinsically linked. The objective of the exercise is to ensure that Towcester and Daventry thrive in their own right and do not merely become dormitory satellites of a growing Northampton.
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1039
Northampton needs major physical regeneration, with large areas of underused or unused land. Of course, it has a considerable number of brownfield sites. Anyone who has been to any of the great sporting events in the area, or who has been diverted off the M1 when it is closed on to the A5, will realise that Towcester is divided by the A5—my brief says "severed". It has inadequate social infrastructure and is slowly becoming a dormitory town. I had driven through it, but had never stopped the car until a visit in relation to the issue a year ago. Daventry is much further advanced than Towcester into dormitory status. It requires substantial investment to resurrect the town centre.
The boundaries focus development on the three major settlements; we do not seek to go into the outlying villages. As I set out in my evidence to the committee, protection of the countryside and the need to concentrate development on brownfield land will be key priorities for the urban development corporation.
The corporations are of course intended as short-life bodies. They are there for a particular purpose—to manage the sustainable growth and make sure that we get maximum benefit from it. The typical lifespan for urban development corporations has been seven to 10 years. That is normally sufficient time to develop and implement a strategy, organise a delivery plan, tackle land assembly problems—they can be very complicated—and then revert to the normal local government arrangements. This urban development corporation will have an indicative lifespan of 10 years, but we will conduct a review after five years.
It is the Government's intention to seek approval at a later date to give the urban development corporation powers to determine strategic planning applications. I want to emphasise that all the householder and minor planning applications will always remain with the local authority, even when we have the powers for the strategic sites. We are talking about the large strategic sites, although I fully accept that strategic sites are sometimes not necessarily the largest. It is those key sites that determine the growth at which we need to look from the urban development corporation's point of view.
In exercising its development control function—the granting of planning permission or otherwise—the urban development corporation will undertake at least the same degree of community consultation as ordinary planning authorities. Of course, that has considerably increased as a result of the passage of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, so a lot more consultation is to take place. Although the corporation is not fixed—a chairman-designate has been appointed—frankly, I have every confidence that the chairman will out-consult anyone else in the area. That is the nature of the person concerned, Mr Keith Barwell.
The urban development corporation will operate on the basis of partnership with the community and the key players. Partnership and a commitment to effective community engagement represent a fundamental change from what has happened with urban development
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1040
corporations in the past. I do not want to be critical of the past, but this is not London Docklands or Milton Keynes mark No. 1. I pay tribute to the previous government; both governments have used urban development corporations in a wholly different way. I know that from what happened in Birmingham Heartlands, the Black Country with the development corporation, and, I believe, in Manchester. Different and more benign kinds of urban development corporations worked on a partnership and consultative basis there, rather than putting a wall up and doing everything themselves. They have also been much more effective in taking the population along with them.
The corporation represents a new era of co-operation to drive forward an urban renaissance for the benefit of all the people of west Northamptonshire. I beg to move.
Moved, That the order laid before the House on 13 May be approved.—(Lord Rooker.)
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |