English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville
Main Page: Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville's debates with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
(1 day, 17 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, Amendment 5 is in my name and that of the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle. The Bill is extensive, covering many areas of local government, and aims for the improved delivery of services by local and strategic authorities. The areas of competence for strategic authorities covered by the Bill are listed in Clause 2; mindful of the Whip’s instructions at the beginning, I will not list them, but all are extremely important. I propose adding rural affairs to that list.
Over the years I have been in your Lordships’ House, I have often promoted the need for rural affairs to take a more prominent place in government thinking. The previous Government brought forward strategies for industry, business, cities, et cetera, but nothing for rural areas. Why do those who live in rural communities get such short shrift? The funding of rural school education is inadequate compared with that received by urban schools. The buses are infrequent, GP surgeries are in larger villages, the pub has closed, the local shop exists on a knife edge, the roads are repaired irregularly, and top dressing appears to be a thing of the past.
Those who live in rural areas are not living a life of luxury in idyllic countryside. Having to travel miles to a supermarket or by bus for a GP or dentist appointment or to get their hair cut can be a real problem for the elderly, the infirm and young families. Many families may not have a car, or perhaps the one car they have is taken by the breadwinner to get to work. A trip to the GP by bus could well take half a day. In areas where there are two buses a day, one going into town in the morning and the other coming back late afternoon, it could take all day.
The relevant local, parish or town council will be aware of the problems of service delivery in isolated areas. Likewise, the district council, when there was one, had brilliant knowledge of the problems of its community. Where the village shop has been threatened, in some cases the community has come together to run it with volunteers. Some pubs have been run by community volunteers on the same basis. Communities themselves know who would welcome a lift to town to keep important appointments. Larger strategic authorities are unlikely to have this knowledge at their fingertips, so they will need a strategy to support rural areas.
Children and young people are particularly disadvantaged by living in rural areas. The school bus picks them up in the morning and drops them off in the afternoon, but there is nothing to take them to a friend’s house three miles away for a chat on a Friday evening. There is no youth club in their hamlet or village where they can relax with those of a similar age. The village bus stop, where there is one, is often the congregation point for young people in the early evenings—they know they will not be disturbed because no bus will stop there. Mum and dad, where they have a car, will often provide the essential transport for young people to meet up with their friends.
Living in a rural area does not mean that you wish to give up your independence. Moving to larger, more strategic local government delivery could be a lifesaver for some communities, but it could also mean that deep rural areas will be overlooked. Population numbers matter when allocating finance. Everyone understands that the limited resources must cover the greatest number of people, but that should not be an excuse to ignore rural deprivation and poverty. I will not go into detail on the complicated issue of rural housing, where larger four- or five-bedroom homes are often built when what is required are smaller starter homes to rent and to buy, as others who have amendments in this group will do this more eloquently than I.
The Bill is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to get the delivery of services via local government on a quite different level. Now is the time for rural areas to have full consideration in the context of housing and strategic planning, health, well-being and public service reform and the other services listed in Clause 2. Adding rural affairs to the list of competences is a must. Rural communities are not a “nice to have” requirement, they are a “must”. This group of amendments is essential for rural communities. I welcome the amendments from the noble Baronesses, Lady McIntosh of Pickering and Lady Royall of Blaisdon. I urge the Government to take this opportunity to ensure that rural communities are treated on a par with their urban counterparts. I look forward to the Minister’s response, as I am sure she understands the strength of support for rural affairs to be recognised on the face of the Bill. I beg to move.
My Lords, I thank the noble Baronesses, Lady Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville and Lady McIntosh of Pickering, as well as my noble friend Lady Royall of Blaisdon, for their amendments, for the many discussions that we have had and for their engagement on rural issues in the Bill.
Before I comment on the individual amendments, let me say that a number of noble Lords have mentioned the Commission for Rural Communities. This body, which had primary responsibility for rural-proofing, was formally abolished in 2013, a decision taken by the coalition Government in the bonfire of the quangos. I mention this just in case anyone was left with the impression that it was this Government that had abolished it.
On Amendment 5, I have noted previously that strategic authorities will operate across a wide range of geographies in England, encompassing both highly urbanised regions and more rural areas. The Bill is therefore intended to equip mayors and strategic authorities with the powers that they need to support communities across their entire areas. That is why the areas of competence are deliberately broad. This allows a wide range of activity to fall within scope. In this way, rural issues are already reflected in, for example,
“transport and local infrastructure; … housing and strategic planning”,
and
“the environment and climate change”.
Already we are seeing strategic authorities support rural communities. The East Midlands Combined County Authority has set out a programme of rural affairs and farming projects. These include examining the potential to promote microgeneration and energy independence for farmers and small businesses and committing to convene rural partners to discuss solutions for flood prevention.
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Cameron, for his welcome for the Government’s recent move to recognise the very sharp increases to fuel costs faced by rural communities because of the current conflicts in the Middle East. I welcome that too.
I turn now to Amendments 52 and 61. The Government have introduced amendments to increase the number of commissioners a mayor may appoint. This will increase flexibility by allowing multiple commissioners to operate in a single area of competence and ensure commissioners can operate in one or more aspects of an area rather than the area as a whole. Doing so will enable mayors to appoint commissioners with local cross-cutting briefs and allow them to enlist additional support within a given area. This could mean, for example, two commissioners operating within transport and local infrastructure, with one focused on rural connectivity and the other on active travel.
However, commissioners are intended to be an optional appointment for mayors, whereas the amendments tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, would mandate the appointment of a rural commissioner, removing the mayor’s right to choose. There is already considerable scope for a mayor to appoint a commissioner and provide them with a bespoke brief and title—for example, to position them as an advocate on rural matters within the combined authority or the combined county authority area. The areas of competence are intended to capture broad thematic priorities affecting all communities irrespective of whether they are rural or urban.
The challenges faced by rural communities are addressed within the existing eight areas. Not all strategic authorities have substantial rural populations; some are predominantly urban. A stand-alone competence for rural affairs risks implying that the challenges faced by rural communities are unique to those settings alone. While the specific factors affecting communities will vary place by place, many, such as poor transport connectivity, are shared across rural and non-rural areas alike. In fact, to respond to the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, you could have had a party in the bus stops in my area until very recently when, thanks to some active campaigning, we did get evening buses, but only a couple of years ago there were no buses after 7 pm at all.
Where there is a significant rural population, strategic authorities should be considering the particular challenges and opportunities affecting those communities. This includes housing, where local authorities in local plans and mayors in strategic plans must consider the needs of rural housing and it will be mayors who set the strategic priorities for their area.
The noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, mentioned the powers of the mayor and the land use framework. Of course, mayors, like all other planning authorities, will have to take account of relevant documents including the land use framework, which sets out clearly the need for land for food production.
I turn to Amendment 310. Supporting rural communities is a priority for this Government. We want rural areas to feel the benefits of devolution just as strongly as our major towns and cities. The Bill already equips strategic authorities and mayors with powers that can be used to respond to rural priorities, including in areas such as transport, housing delivery, economic growth and skills. We can already see how mayors and strategic authorities are using these powers to deliver for rural residents. The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, may not like strategic authorities very much, but York and North Yorkshire is trialling new affordable housing models for rural communities and the North East Combined Authority has established a dedicated coastal and rural task force to ensure rural and coastal communities have a clear voice in investment decisions.
Finally, I turn to Amendment 326. The Government should not assume they have a better understanding of rural needs and opportunities within strategic authority areas than those areas themselves. Strategic authorities working closely with their constituent councils and communities are best placed to assess local rural circumstances. This amendment would add bureaucracy without improving outcomes. Therefore, I respectfully invite the noble Baronesses not to press their amendments.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her considered comments and thank all those Peers who have taken part in this debate. Between us, we have managed to cover nearly every aspect of the disadvantage of living in rural communities.
I was very disappointed to be reminded about rural-proofing, because we were championing that years ago—and here we are today, trying to get it back again. It is so important that those who live in rural areas have tailored approaches to those areas, as has already been said. We need to think about agriculture, food production and housing. Housing is so important, along with jobs.
I hear the Minister’s reassurance that rural areas are covered in all the other competences. I have not been here for as long as some people, but I have been here nearly 13 years. I have heard that phrase so many times, but it never happens for rural areas. I feel that it is really important that rural affairs are given the weight they deserve by being in the Bill as a competence. I therefore wish to test the opinion of the House.