English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill

Baroness Boycott Excerpts

Committee stage
Monday 9th February 2026 Grand Committee

However, we cannot accept this amendment for several reasons. First, local authorities already have clear statutory duties regarding allotments. District, unitary and parish councils have a duty to provide allotments where there is sufficient demand and acquire land if necessary. They also benefit from long-standing protections. Statutory allotment land cannot be disposed of without the consent of the Secretary of State. Tenants also receive security of tenure and compensation rights under the 1922 and 1950 Acts. These duties form a comprehensive legal framework for the provision and protection of allotments at the local authority level. Secondly, the amendment would place operational burdens on combined authorities—bodies that do not own or manage allotments—and the publishing requirements would duplicate duties that sit with local authorities. Thirdly, combined authorities are intended to operate at a strategic level, not to take on detailed service-level responsibilities already covered by existing legislation. Finally, the amendment would create an unfunded new burden on combined authorities, against our commitment to ensure that new devolved responsibilities remain deliverable and do not impose avoidable costs or duplicate existing statutory frameworks.

[Baroness Boycott (CB)]

I thank the Minister, but half of the amendment is not about allotments. Having run this scheme in London, I know that allotments are almost impossible to get. It is also about the right to grow on meanwhile lease bases within communities and councils. Meanwhile leases are available online. It is extremely easy: it just needs the local authority to agree that wasted spaces can be used for growing and then taken away if a builder, developer or council wants them back.

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

I do not disagree with the noble Baroness. I am saying that this is a local authority duty, and it does not need to go up to the strategic level of a mayoral combined authority. That is why we do not need the amendment for combined authorities, but I accept her point about local authorities. A statutory duty is probably not applicable anyway, but I will give that some further thought, if she is happy for me to do so.

We recognise all the benefits of allotments and community gardening, but we do not want to duplicate existing legal responsibilities or place burdens at the wrong tier of government, which would run counter to the Government’s approach to devolution. I am sorry for going on for so long, but there were a lot of amendments in this group. As I have explained the Government’s rationale for resisting these amendments in detail, I request that they are not pressed.