English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill

Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville Excerpts

Consideration of Commons amendments and / or reasons
Thursday 23rd April 2026 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville]

Leave out from “House” to the end and insert “do insist on its Amendment 2, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 2A.”

[Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville (LD)]

My Lords, I beg to move Motion A1 as an amendment to Motion A. The Commons have disagreed with our amendment, which was carried 285 to 156: a majority of 129 and a pretty convincing endorsement of the strength of feeling in the Chamber for rural affairs to get the recognition they deserve. I am grateful for the Minister’s letter and offer for rural affairs to be included in non-statutory guidance.

The reasons given by the Commons were that rural affairs are covered by the other competences in Clause 2 of the Bill, as the Minister has already referred to. Just as rural-proofing was considered an essential element of any service delivery, infrastructure project or change to local government, it should have been an essential element of the planning all through the process. The question should continually be asked, “How will what is being proposed affect rural areas?”

Rural England covers the largest geographical area of England but has the smallest proportion of population. The large towns and cities, due to the ease of connectivity, attract business of every description and provide jobs and economic prosperity. Ever since the Industrial Revolution of the early 1800s, this has been the case—but even Arkwright built his mills in rural Derbyshire.

This morning, I have been contacted by Richard Hebditch of the Better Planning Coalition, who emphasised how important rural areas are. If I may, I will quote from his email, in which he states:

“The concept of strategic authorities draws on the previous development of metro mayors for large urban areas. Much of their focus will be on economic growth, transport and other infrastructure, and the Government is clear that it sees its cities and larger towns as the focus for both economic growth and infrastructure investment. We are concerned that there is a strong risk that rural areas will be sidelined as strategic authorities draw up SDSs as well as in the other strategies and plans. We therefore welcome current Lords Amendment 2, which inserts rural affairs as a competency for strategic authorities”.


I am grateful to Richard Hebditch for his information this morning.

Those who live in rural areas want the same benefits as those who live in highly populated areas. We want the strategic authorities and the mayors to consider how their future plans will affect those in rural areas. The benefits of a thriving economy, good infrastructure, a buoyant jobs market, decent homes and good connectivity, especially digital as we enter the AI-dominated era, should be the right of those in rural areas. The town and parish councils are likely to be overlooked if care is not taken.

I recently returned from a short stay in rural Norfolk, where my mobile phone coverage was very patchy. Even at home in Hampshire, where I live on the outskirts of a village but only 200 yards from the secondary college which services a large area, bringing students in on double-decker buses, I have difficulty with my mobile reception. If I want to make a phone call or answer an incoming call, I have to go into the lounge at the front of my home to get sufficient signal to be able to have anything like a decent conversation.

The majority of 129 on the amendment on 24 March was one of the largest majorities, if not the largest majority, on this Bill, and demonstrates the strength of feeling in the Chamber on the importance of rural affairs. I remain convinced that rural England will get the recognition it deserves only if it is in the Bill and is covered in statutory guidance, not relegated to non-statutory guidance, which is not sufficient. Every policy and strategy brought forward by mayors and strategic authorities should have been through a process whereby the question has been asked and considered, “How will this affect those living in rural areas?” How will this affect their safety, environment, access to decent affordable housing and travel arrangements? Asking commissioners to consider rural affairs if they wish, I am afraid, does not cut it. I beg to move.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville (LD)]

My Lords, I thank those taking part in this short debate, and I also thank the Minister for her comments. However, I disagree that leaving the consideration of rural affairs to the discretion of strategic authorities and mayors and not including it specifically on the face of the Bill, nor in statutory guidance, is sufficient. Non-statutory guidance can be easily set aside. Now is an opportunity to recognise the importance of rural affairs. I wish to test the opinion of the House.