Draft West Midlands Combined Authority Order 2016

Lord Wharton of Yarm Excerpts

Monday 6th June 2016 General Committees

[The Chair]

Before I call the Minister to move the motion, I should inform Members who are not on the Committee that it is in order for them to speak but not to vote.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (James Wharton)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the draft West Midlands Combined Authority Order 2016.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Davies. The draft order was laid before the House on 28 April 2016. If approved, it will create a combined authority for the west midlands. It will also dissolve the West Midlands integrated transport authority and the West Midlands passenger transport executive and will transfer their functions to the newly established combined authority. The draft order is made pursuant to provisions of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009, as amended by the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016.

The seven constituent councils of Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton have led a truly local and bottom-up process to produce a proposal for the establishment of the combined authority. They believe that this governance model is the most appropriate way for the west midlands to achieve stronger, more efficient and more effective delivery of economic development, regeneration and transport responsibilities. If the draft order receives parliamentary approval, the West Midlands combined authority will be the second combined authority established since the amendments to the 2009 Act made by the 2016 Act, and the seventh established in the past five years.

While establishing the combined authority in no sense commits the councils concerned, or indeed the Government, to creating a mayor for the area or devolving powers to the area, the councils and the Government both intend to use the combined authority as the foundation for implementing the devolution deal that we have agreed with the west midlands.

The draft order provides for the combined authority to assume responsibility for economic development, regeneration and transport. It will enable the seven councils and their partners, including the three local enterprise partnerships and the five non-constituent members—Cannock Chase, Nuneaton and Bedworth, Redditch, Tamworth, and Telford and Wrekin— to work together more effectively and efficiently, to promote economic growth, to secure investment and to create jobs.

In laying the draft order, we have followed the statutory process specified in the 2009 Act, as amended by the 2016 Act. A combined authority can be established only if the councils concerned consent, if the Government agree and if Parliament approves the necessary secondary legislation. That is the case here: the seven constituent councils have consented to the order; the Government have agreed the draft of the order; and we are now seeking Parliament’s approval for making the order, which will establish the combined authority on 10 June. We have considered the particular circumstances of this proposal for a combined authority, and we have concluded that all the statutory conditions are met. We are satisfied that the order is likely to improve the exercise of statutory functions in the area to which it relates, and we also consider it appropriate to establish the combined authority, having regard, as the 2009 Act requires, to the need to reflect the identities and interests of local communities and to secure effective and convenient local government. Finally, we have considered the public consultation carried out by the constituent councils of the west midlands on the proposals. I can confirm that we believe the conditions have been met, and we therefore seek the Committee’s approval of the draft order. I am pleased to commend the order to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[James Wharton]

The shadow Minister, whom I welcome to her place, is a wily foe at the worst of times and desperately effective at the best of times. She has deprived me of the opportunity to hear the dulcet tones of the hon. Member for Easington, whose contribution I had been very much looking forward to. She has tempted the Committee to stray into talking about another piece of legislation—namely, the process by which a mayor could be elected to be accountable for some of the powers that are hopefully being transferred down, should Parliament so wish it, in co-operation with the local authorities. As I am sure you are aware, Mr Davies, we are not here today to talk about that particular aspect of devolution agreements. This statutory instrument creates a combined authority that has been agreed with local authorities in a bottom-up way, rather than as a top-down deal. I remind the Committee that a deal is a two-way process. A deal must be agreed by both parties or sets of parties, and that is what we have before us today.

The temptation from the shadow Minister was such that the right hon. Member for Warley indulged a little in discussion of the mayor, while raising a number of points of concern to him. He commented on the membership of this Committee. I am pleased to see so many hon. Members who are so well informed about the specific geography of the area we are here to discuss, devolution more generally, and the ambitions of this Government and of local areas that want to engage in this programme and benefit from economic growth. He talked about hypothetical future transfers and what the funding arrangements for those might be. I do not wish to get into that debate in too much detail, it being hypothetical, but in our approach to devolution, it is the intention of this Government that powers will be transferred where they are asked for by local areas. That is done by agreement. Indeed, the proposed combined authority is very much in that vein.

The hon. Member for Coventry South, who is spending much of his day in discussion with me—we earlier discussed the exceptional growth in jobs in Coventry and how welcome that is—spoke about the mayor, and about the responsibility we and local areas have to deliver for local people and to build on the economic success that Coventry in particular has enjoyed over the past six years.

I have here a letter from October 2015 from the shadow authority, which represented the leaders of some of the local councils and authorities. It states:

“The headline conclusion of the review is that establishing a West Midlands Combined Authority would improve the exercise of statutory functions in relation to economic development, regeneration and transport in the West Midlands.”

It continues:

“A Combined Authority would help maximise growth in output and jobs. A region-wide focus on productivity, competiveness and raising skill levels would put the region in the best position to achieve its economic vision and economic goals.”

This is a deal—it is a two-way process. In these areas, we have worked with local authority leaders representing the communities they are elected to represent. We have come to an agreement about a geography and a set of powers.

[Mr Spellar]

Does the Minister accept that, faced with the option of going along with the deal and making the best of a bad job, and having suffered horrendous cuts—in the hundreds and thousands of millions across the conurbation—it is not surprising that, with the offer of a rebate, albeit a small part of that, those councils would accept that option? They were defending as best they could their interests against a Chancellor of the Exchequer who was using that rebate quite blatantly as a bribe to get his political project through.

[James Wharton]

I remind the Committee:

“A Combined Authority would help maximise growth in output and jobs. A region-wide focus on productivity, competiveness and raising skill levels would put the region in the best position to achieve its economic vision and economic goals.”

Glancing at the letter, I do not see reference to a hypothetical argument about local government funding, which is entirely separate from the process by which either devolution or combined authorities are agreed.

[Julian Knight]

I am struck by this Opposition tale of woe from parties that are part of the combined authority. At the bottom of the letter is the name of Councillor Robert Sleigh, who is the leader of the shadow authority and of a Conservative authority in Solihull, and a driving force behind the initiative. We are not so poverty stricken that Solihull council has not been able to freeze its council tax for five years, while still having leading services nationally.

[James Wharton]

That is another comparison to draw. As we know, council tax more or less doubled under the previous Labour Administration. It has reduced in real terms by 9% over the past six years. That reduction has helped many of the people we represent, and many of the people represented by what we are discussing today. I commend Councillor Bob Sleigh not only for his leadership on this issue, but for ensuring that this is a cross-party proposal. The deal has been agreed across the parties and it will deliver real benefits to those communities.

[Mr Cunningham]

It should be pointed out that Solihull agreed to get involved in the new set-up for the west midlands authority fairly recently; it was opposed initially.

[James Wharton]

The hon. Gentleman, sharp and observant as always, puts his finger on the key issue: this is something that more and more areas want to be part of. They see what is happening and the benefits, and they want to sign up. It is a bottom-up process. It is not being imposed by the Government; it is a matter of local areas coming together, putting forward proposals and reaching an agreement.

This is a good proposal for the west midlands, which will help to bring together those local authorities that want to drive economic growth and build on what has already been done. I commend it unreservedly to the Committee. I trust that the Committee will support it, and I hope that the support in this place will be cross-party, as it is in those local communities that stand to benefit from what we will hopefully agree to today.

Question put and agreed to.