(5 days, 19 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
I am privileged to be able to open this Third Reading debate following constructive debates on Report. Let me first reiterate my thanks to Members on both sides of the House for their thoughtful contributions during the Bill’s passage.
The Bill cements the Government’s commitment to powering up our regions, rebuilding local government and empowering our communities, which is fundamental to achieving the changes that our constituents expect and deserve: better living standards, improved public services and politics being done with communities, not to them. This Government’s ambition is to bring power and decision making closer to the people who know their areas best. The Bill will truly empower residents to shape the places where they live and work, and from fixing our broken local audit system to empowering mayors to unlock the economic potential of their places, it will set local government on a firmer footing and enable local leaders to deliver a decade of national renewal. These changes are long overdue, and we are now taking ambitious action where previous Governments have failed.
I extend my thanks to everyone who has played a role in getting the Bill to this stage. I am particularly grateful to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government for his dedication and commitment to this agenda. I am also grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) for his leadership, and for the huge amount of work that he put into developing this impressive piece of legislation. I thank the Members on both sides of the House who scrutinised the Bill in such detail in Committee, and I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds), for his constructive and, for the most part, collaborative approach.
Let me also put on record my thanks to representatives of the wider local government sector, especially those who gave evidence earlier this year. They are critical actors in providing the frontline services that residents need and deserve, and, whether they are councillors, mayors, police and crime commissioners or third sector representatives, the House thanks them for their service. I hope that colleagues in the other place continue to take the same collaborative approach that has been taken in this House, and I wish Baroness Taylor of Stevenage the best with moving the Bill forward. I commend it to the House.
(6 days, 19 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Government new clause 44—Licensing functions of the Mayor of London.
New clause 2—Council tax: CAs and CCAs to be subject to same increase as most county and unitary councils—
“(1) The Local Government Finance Act 1992 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 52ZC, after subsection (4) insert—
‘(4A) Where, for the purposes of this section, the Secretary of State determines categories of authority for the year under consideration, one of the categories determined by the Secretary of State must include all mayoral combined authorities and CCAs (‘the CA and CCA category’).
(4B) Where the Secretary of State has determined a category that includes the majority of county and unitary councils (“a county and unitary category”), a principle that must be applied to the CA and CAA category is that the means of determining whether the relevant basic amount of council tax is excessive is the same as any means set out in a principle applied to the county and unitary category (but for the purposes of the determination references to any referendum principle for county and unitary councils that specifically relates to expenditure on adult social care should be discounted).’”
This new clause would limit increases in the mayoral precept according to similar principles limiting council tax increases.
New clause 4—Application of CIL to householders—
“(1) The Planning Act 2008 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 205 (The levy) after subsection (2) insert—
‘(2A) In making the regulations, the Secretary of State may not charge CIL on householders’ property extensions that are for their own use.
(2B) The Secretary of State must amend the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010 so that they are in accordance with the requirements of subsection (2A).’”
This new clause disapplies CIL from householders extending property for their own use.
New clause 5—Power of mayors to convene meetings with local public service providers and government—
“(1) After section 17B of LURA 2023 (inserted by section 21 of this Act) insert—
‘17C Mayoral duty to convene meetings with local public service providers and government
(1) The mayor for the area of a CCA must convene regular meetings with—
(a) principal local authorities within their area,
(b) public service providers in their area, and
(c) town and parish councils within their area.
(2) A meeting under subsection (1) must occur at least every 12 months.’
(2) After section 103B of LDEDCA 2009 (inserted by section 21 of this Act) insert—
‘103C Mayoral duty to convene meetings with local public service providers and government
(1) The mayor for the area of a combined authority must convene regular meetings with—
(a) principal local authorities within their area,
(b) public service providers in their area, and
(c) town and parish councils within their area.
(2) A meeting under subsection (1) must occur at least every 12 months.’
(3) After section 40B of GLAA 1999 (inserted by section 21 of this Act) insert—
‘40C Mayoral duty to convene meetings with local public service providers and government
(1) The Mayor must convene regular meetings with—
(a) principal local authorities within their area,
(b) public service providers in their area, and
(c) town and parish councils within their area.
(2) A meeting under subsection (1) must occur at least every 12 months.’”
This new clause would require mayors of combined authorities, mayors of CCAs, and the Mayor of London to regularly convene meetings with local government actors within their area.
New clause 7—Consideration of existing adult skills provision—
“(1) A strategic authority has a duty to consider—
(a) existing education and training provision for persons aged 16 to 19 in its area, and
(b) existing higher education provision in its area
when carrying out any function conferred on it by virtue of Schedule 10 to this Act.
(2) The Secretary of State may issue guidance about how a strategic authority may comply with the duty under this section.”
This new clause would require strategic authorities to consider existing provision for 16 to 19 education and higher education in their area when exercising adult education functions.
New clause 8—Annual reporting on adult education funding—
“(1) A strategic authority exercising any function conferred on it by virtue of Schedule 10 of this Act must publish an annual report on its exercise of such functions.
(2) A report under this section must include—
(a) how a strategic authority has applied adult education funding to meet local skills needs;
(b) a summary of coordination arrangements with employer representative bodies and other skills providers within the authority;
(c) a summary of outcomes for adult learners and local employers regarding—
(i) learner achievement of qualifications and progression to employment or further learning,
(ii) employer satisfaction with the skills and capabilities of adult learners, and
(iii) the alignment between skills provision and identified local labour market needs.
(3) The Secretary of State may issue guidance about—
(a) any further content of, and
(b) publication of reports under this section.”
This new clause would require Strategic Authorities to publish annual reports on their exercise of adult education functions, demonstrating how public funding has been deployed, coordination arrangements with local skills providers, and outcomes achieved for adult learners and employers.
New clause 9—Authority involvement in local skills improvement plans—
“(1) Section 1 of the Skills and Post-16 Education Act 2022 is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (7), after ‘relevant authority’ insert ‘and, where the specified area covers any of the area of a strategic authority, the strategic authority’.
(3) After subsection (7) insert—
‘(7A) Where a specified area covers any of the area of a strategic authority, the Secretary of State may approve and publish a local skills improvement plan for the specified area only if satisfied that—
(a) the strategic authority and the employer representative body for the area have exercised joint leadership in developing the plan,
(b) the plan has been agreed by both the strategic authority and the employer representative body, and
(c) the boundaries of the plan align with the strategic authority boundaries.
(7B) For the purposes of subsection (7A), ‘joint leadership’ means that—
(a) strategic priorities for skills development in the area are agreed by both the strategic authority and the employer representative body, and
(b) spending priorities relating to devolved adult education funding are jointly determined.
(7C) A local skills improvement plan may only be altered if both the strategic authority and the employer representative body agree to any proposed alterations.
(7D) Where there is disagreement between a Strategic Authority and an employer representative body exercising joint leadership under subsection (7A), either party may refer the matter to the Secretary of State, who may—
(a) issue guidance to resolve the disagreement;
(b) give directions to either or both parties to ensure effective coordination;
(c) require the parties to adopt alternative arrangements for decision-making;
(d) approve and publish a plan that addresses the disagreement.
(7E) In exercising functions under subsection (7D), the Secretary of State must have regard to—
(a) the effective delivery of post-16 technical education and training in the area,
(b) employer engagement in identifying local skills needs,
(c) value for money in delivery of services by Strategic Authorities, and
(d) democratic accountability of Strategic Authorities in delivering such services.’
(4) Section 4 of the Skills and Post-16 Education Act 2022 is amended as follows.
(5) In subsection (1), at the appropriate place insert—
‘“strategic authority” has the meaning given by section 1(2) of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2025;’”.
This new clause would require Strategic Authorities to exercise joint leadership with employer representative bodies in developing Local Skills Improvement Plans. The amendment also requires Local Skills Improvement Plan boundaries to align with Strategic Authority boundaries to enable effective coordination and provides dispute resolution mechanisms where joint leadership arrangements encounter difficulties.
New clause 14—Policy delivery in areas of competence—
“(1) Any function of a mayoral combined authority or mayoral combined county authority which—
(a) relates to an area of competence, and
(b) is not a mayoral function exercisable solely by the mayor
must be exercised by or under the direct authority of the constituent members of that authority.
(2) No person may be appointed to exercise any function that relates to making or delivering policy relating to an area of competence unless that person is an elected member of—
(a) the relevant strategic authority, or
(b) a constituent council within the relevant strategic authority.
(3) Nothing in this section is to be taken as preventing the appointment of staff by the strategic authority or its elected members for the purposes of administrative, advisory or technical support for the exercise of its functions.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “a constituent member” means any elected representative who is—
(a) appointed by a constituent council to be a member of the mayoral combined authority or mayoral combined county authority;
(b) acting in the place of a person appointed under paragraph (a).”
This new clause provides that any policy delivery or development relating to an area of competence in a strategic authority is carried out by an elected representative.
New clause 15—Duty to ensure public trust and financial transparency—
“(1) The mayor for the area of a combined authority or combined county authority must take reasonable steps to ensure that information regarding the authority’s financial affairs, including its annual budget, significant expenditure, and financial performance, is made accessible to local communities in a clear and understandable manner.
(2) The mayor must publish a policy setting out how the combined authority or combined county authority will engage with local communities on its financial priorities and major spending decisions, and review this policy periodically.”
This new clause requires mayors of CAs and CCAs to ensure that financial information is accessible and understandable to local communities.
New clause 23—Transport authority functions: funding and support—
“(1) The Secretary of State must ensure that relevant authorities have sufficient financial resources and adequate administrative support to discharge effectively any functions relating to transport conferred on them by this Act.
(2) In discharging the duty under subsection (1), the Secretary of State must regularly review the financial and administrative needs of those authorities in relation to their transport functions, taking into account the scale and complexity of those functions.
(3) For the purposes of this section, ‘functions relating to transport conferred on them by this Act’ means—
(a) functions of a local transport authority as described in Schedule 9, and
(b) any other functions reasonably connected with the transport.”
This new clause creates a requirement for regular reviews of the financial and administrative needs of authorities to carry out their transport functions.
New clause 24—Duty to publish and implement a forward devolution strategy—
“(1) The Secretary of State must, within two years beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, prepare and publish a forward devolution strategy (‘the strategy’).
(2) The purpose of the strategy is to set out the proposed timeline for the establishment of new strategic authorities, or the expansion of existing strategic authorities, in areas of England that are not currently within the area of an established mayoral strategic authority.
(3) The timeline set out in the strategy must include a period within which the Secretary of State intends to issue invitations or directions for proposals for the establishment or expansion of such new strategic authorities for those identified areas.
(4) Any annual report required under section 1 of the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 (inserted by section 19 of this Act) must include a statement on the progress made in implementing the strategy, including information on any revision of or replacement for the strategy.
(5) Before preparing, publishing, or revising the strategy, the Secretary of State must consult—
(a) the mayors for the areas of established mayoral strategic authorities; and
(b) the constituent councils of combined authorities and combined county authorities.”
This new clause would introduce a commitment to publish a strategy and timeline for further devolution.
New clause 25—Community infrastructure levy charges: guidance—
“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, prepare and publish guidance for charging authorities on—
(a) the implementation and administration of community infrastructure levy charges;
(b) appropriate procedures for handling technical errors in the calculation, notification, or collection of community infrastructure levy charges; and
(c) best practice for resolving disputes relating to community infrastructure levy charges where technical errors have occurred.
(2) The guidance under subsection (1) must include—
(a) guidance on what constitutes a technical error in the context of community infrastructure levy charges;
(b) recommended procedures for reviewing and, where appropriate, waiving or reducing community infrastructure levy charges where a technical error has occurred;
(c) principles to guide the proportionate collection of community infrastructure levy payments when technical errors have been identified; and
(d) time limits for the rectification of technical errors.
(3) In this section—
‘charging authority’ has the meaning given in section 106 of the Planning Act 2008, as amended by Schedule 14 of this Act;
‘technical error’ means an error in the calculation, notification, or administration of a Community Infrastructure Levy charge that is not related to a material change in the development to which the charge applies.”
New clause 28—Regional governance—
“(1) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide for the establishment of a regional governance body in any part of England, where in the opinion of the Secretary of State there is demonstrable local support for such a body.
(2) Regulations made under this section must—
(a) provide that—
(i) a regional governance body is a body corporate,
(ii) the name of any such body is determined locally, and
(iii) the structure and membership of any such body is determined following consultation with people who live in the relevant part of England;
(b) confer functions upon a regional governance body in relation to—
(i) education and skills,
(ii) transport,
(iii) health and social care,
(iv) housing and planning, and
(v) such other matters as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.
(3) in making regulations under this section, the Secretary of State must have regard to—
(a) the promotion of effective and accountable regional governance,
(b) the identity and aspirations of the region concerned, and
(c) the principle of subsidiarity.
(4) Regulations under this section are subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.”
This new clause would enable the establishment of regional governance bodies in parts of England, such as a Yorkshire Parliament or Cornish Assembly, with locally determined names and structures, and allow them to be conferred with responsibilities in areas including education, transport, health and housing, where there is local support.
New clause 29—Duty to contribute to delivery of nature, clean air and climate targets—
“(1) When exercising their functions, a strategic authority, mayor, or local authority must contribute to—
(a) meeting the targets and carbon budgets set under Part 1 of the Climate Change Act 2008;
(b) meeting the targets and interim targets set under Part 1 of the Environment Act 2021;
(c) meeting the limit values set under Schedule 2 of the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010; and
(d) the delivery of the programme for adaptation to climate change under section 58 of the Climate Change Act 2008.
(2) A strategic authority, mayor or local authority must not make any decision that is incompatible with the duty described in subsection (1).
(3) Within one year beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, the Secretary of State must publish guidance describing the contribution that each strategic authority should make toward meeting the targets listed in subsection (1).
(4) Guidance under subsection (3) must include clear metrics and measurable terms for strategic authorities, mayors and local authorities to meet.”
This new clause requires strategic authorities, mayors, and local authorities to act in accordance with the statutory Climate Change Act and Environmental Act targets, carbon budgets, Air Quality Standards Regulations, and climate adaptation programme across their functions. The Secretary of State must publish guidance for defining authorities’ contributions towards these objectives.
New clause 30—Visitor levies—
“(1) The Secretary of State must conduct a review into giving local authorities powers to introduce visitor levies within their area.
(2) The review in subsection (1) may only consider a visitor levy which directs receipts from the levy into the relevant authority’s general fund.
(3) The Secretary of State must lay a report on the review in subsection (1) before both Houses of Parliament within 12 months of the passage of this Act.”
New clause 31—Overnight accommodation levy—
“(1) An EMSA may impose a levy on any overnight accommodation provided within the EMSA’s area (‘the OAL’).
(2) The levy is payable by persons staying for one or more night in exchange for payment in any—
(a) hotel;
(b) guest house, or bed and breakfast;
(c) self-catering accommodation;
(d) short-term let;
(e) campsite or caravan park;
(f) any other premises that the mayor of an EMSA may designate.
(3) Before introducing or modifying an OAL the mayor of an EMSA must consult such as persons as they consider necessary, which must include communities, business and organisations working in or affected by the tourism industry.
(4) The mayor of an EMSA may determine the rate and structure of an OAL, including concessionary rates and exemptions where they consider it appropriate.
(5) The mayor of than EMSA may specify arrangement relating to—
(a) the collection of the OAL,
(b) the administration of the OAL, and
(c) arrangements for circumstances in which the OAL is not complied with.
(6) Receipts from the OAL are to be paid into the general fund of the EMSA.
(7) Monies received under subsection (6) may be used by the mayor of the EMSA for the purposes of—
(a) promoting, developing and managing tourism within the EMSA area;
(b) enhancing infrastructure for the purposes of benefiting tourism in the area;
(c) supporting cultural, sporting and business activity;
(d) preserving or improving heritage assets;
(e) supporting economic growth in the EMSA area
provided that, in the view of the mayor of the EMSA, such use is consistent with the EMSA’s local growth plan.”
New clause 32—Greater London Authority: decision-making—
“(1) The Greater London Authority Act 1999 is amended in accordance with this section.
(2) In section 42B (Assembly’s power to reject draft strategies), in subsection (5)(b), leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority’.
(3) In schedule 4A (Confirmation hearings etc)—
(a) in paragraph 10(5) leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority’;
(b) in paragraph 11(5) leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority’.
(4) In schedule 6 (Procedure for determining the authority’s consolidated council tax requirement)—
(a) in paragraph 8(4) leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority’;
(b) In paragraph 8C(4) leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority’.
(5) In schedule 7 (Procedure for making of substitute calculations by the authority), in paragraph 7(4), leave out ‘at least two thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority’.”
New clause 33—Joint planning committees—
“(1) Within six months of the passage of this Act, the Secretary of State must make regulations which make provision for local authorities which share a border to establish a joint planning committee.
(2) Joint planning committees under subsection (1) may only consider planning applications which are within 0.5 miles of the adjacent authorities’ border.
(3) Regulations under subsection (1) are subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.”
This new clause would require the Secretary of State to make regulations to establish joint planning committees for adjacent authorities to jointly consider planning applications which are within 0.5 miles of their adjoining border.
New clause 39—Regulation of waterborne transport services by regional mayors—
“(1) A mayor for the area of a combined authority, combined county authority, or other mayoral strategic authority may exercise functions relating to waterborne transport services operating wholly within the authority’s area.
(2) Functions exercisable by a mayor may include—
(a) making regulations concerning the provision, operation, safety, accessibility, affordability, and reliability of waterborne transport services;
(b) requiring operators of waterborne transport services to provide such information as the mayor considers necessary for the purposes of monitoring or enforcing compliance with regulations made under paragraph 2(a);
(c) imposing and enforcing conditions relating to a requirement or duty imposed under this section;
(d) imposing and enforcing any penalties resulting from non-compliance with conditions set out under paragraph (2)(c);
(e) regulation of fares and fare structures for waterborne transport services, including imposing a fare cap;
(f) functions relating to accountability of waterborne transport services providers for the delivery and performance of services, including by holding public hearings or inquiries;
(g) any such additional functions as a mayor considers necessary for the purpose of ensuring effective regulation of waterborne transport services within an authority’s area.
(3) Before making regulations under this section, the mayor must consult—
(a) the constituent councils of the combined authority (or equivalent local authorities),
(b) any local transport authorities affected,
(c) operators of waterborne transport services within the area, and
(d) other such persons as the mayor considers appropriate.
(4) Regulations under this section may include provision for appeals against any enforcement action taken by the mayor.
(5) In this section ‘waterborne transport services’ has such meaning as the Secretary of State may by regulations specify, provided that such specification must include—
(a) ferry services, and
(b) water taxi and private hire transport services,
which carry passengers by water between two or more places within the area of the authority.”
This new clause gives mayors of combined and other strategic authorities powers to regulate waterborne transport services in their areas, including the ability to cap fares.
New clause 41—Mayoral CAs and CCAs: any increase in council tax to be subject to referendum—
“(1) The Local Government Finance Act 1992 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 52ZC, before subsection (1) insert—
‘(A1) A mayoral combined authority or mayoral CCA’s relevant basic amount of council tax for a financial year must be determined to be excessive if the financial year is the first financial year in which the authority has charged a relevant basic amount of council tax.’
(3) At the beginning of subsection (1), for ‘The’ substitute ‘In any other case, the’.”
New clause 48—Regulation of ferry services by regional mayors—
“(1) A mayor for the area of a combined authority, combined county authority, or other mayoral strategic authority may exercise functions relating to ferry services operating wholly within the authority’s area.
(2) Functions exercisable by a mayor may include—
(a) making regulations concerning the provision, operation, safety, accessibility, affordability, and reliability of ferry services;
(b) requiring operators of ferry services to provide such information as the mayor considers necessary for the purposes of monitoring or enforcing compliance with regulations made under paragraph 2(a);
(c) imposing and enforcing conditions relating to a requirement or duty imposed under this section;
(d) imposing and enforcing any penalties resulting from non-compliance with conditions set out under paragraph (2)(c);
(e) regulation of fares and fare structures for ferry services, including imposing a fare cap;
(f) functions relating to accountability of ferry service providers for the delivery and performance of services, including by holding public hearings or inquiries;
(g) any such additional functions as a mayor considers necessary for the purpose of ensuring effective regulation of ferry services within an authority’s area.
(3) Before making regulations under this section, the mayor must consult—
(a) the constituent councils of the combined authority (or equivalent local authorities),
(b) any local transport authorities affected,
(c) operators of ferry services within the area, and
(d) other such persons as the mayor considers appropriate.
(4) Regulations under this section may include provision for appeals against any enforcement action taken by the mayor.
(5) In this section ‘ferry services’ means services for the carriage of passengers or vehicles by water between two or more places, all of which are within the area of the authority.”
This new clause gives mayors of combined and other strategic authorities powers to regulate ferry services in their areas, including the ability to cap fares.
New clause 58—Obligation to align decision-making with nature, air quality, and climate targets—
“(1) When exercising their functions, a strategic authority, mayor, or local authority shall refrain from taking any action or decision that would contradict—
(a) the fulfilment of the carbon budgets and targets established under Part 1 of the Climate Change Act 2008;
(b) the achievement of the environmental targets and interim targets set under Part 1 of the Environment Act 2021;
(c) compliance with the limit values provided for in Schedule 2 to the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010; and
(d) implementation of the programme for adapting to climate change prepared under section 58 of the Climate Change Act 2008.
(2) Within one year beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, the Secretary of State must publish guidance describing the contribution that each strategic authority should make toward meeting the requirements in subsection (1).
(3) Guidance under subsection (2) must include clear metrics and measurable terms for strategic authorities, mayors and local authorities to meet.”
This new clause places a duty on strategic authorities, mayors and local authorities to operate consistently with the targets and requirements in the Climate Change Act, the Environment Act, the Air Quality Standards Regulations, and the statutory climate adaptation programme. The Secretary of State must publish guidance for defining authorities’ contributions towards these objectives.
New clause 60—Power to provide for an elected mayor to appoint a deputy mayor—
“(1) The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 (section 107C) is amended as follows:
(2) In subsection (1), leave out “one of the members of the authority to be the mayor's deputy” and substitute ‘a deputy mayor’.
(3) In subsection (3)(c), leave out ‘the person ceases to be a member of the combined authority’ and insert ‘the person ceases to be a councillor of a constituent council of the authority’
(4) In subsection (4), leave out ‘another member of the combined authority’ and substitute ‘another councillor of a constituent council’.”
This new clause would amend section 107C of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 so that a mayor is no longer restricted to appointing a deputy mayor from among the leaders of the constituent local authority members of the Combined Authority.
New clause 61—Mayoral special advisers—
“(1) The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (section 15) is amended as follows.
(2) After section 15 (Definition of ‘special adviser’) insert—
‘15A Mayoral special advisers
(1) A mayor may appoint one mayoral special adviser
(2) A ‘mayoral special adviser’ is a person (‘P’) who holds a position within a mayoral strategic authority and whose appointment to that position meets the requirements in subsection (3).
(3) The requirements are—
(a) P is appointed to assist the Mayor after being selected by the Mayor personally;
(b) the appointment will end not later than—
(i) the day on which the Mayor ceases to hold office, or
(ii) if earlier, the end of the day after the day of the poll at the election following the appointment.
(4) The Secretary of State must publish a code of conduct for mayoral special advisers (‘the code’).
(5) Before publishing the code (or any revision of it) the Secretary of State must consult the Council of Nations and Regions.
(6) The code must provide that a mayoral special adviser may not—
(a) authorise the expenditure of public funds; or
(b) exercise any power in relation to the management of any part of the mayoral or strategic authority.
(7) The code must provide that a mayoral special adviser may—
(a) engage in political activity; and
(b) provide party-political advice to the Mayor.
(8) The code must form part of the terms and conditions of service of any mayoral special adviser.
(9) A person appointed under this section is not to be regarded, for the purposes of Part I of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (political restriction of officers and staff), as holding a politically restricted post under a local authority.’”
This new clause would insert a new section into the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 to establish a statutory framework for the appointment of “mayoral special advisers”. It makes provision about appointment, function, code of conduct, and exemption from political restrictions.
New clause 62—Business Rates Supplement: mayoral authority—
“(1) The Business Rate Supplements Act 2009 (‘the 2009 Act’) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 2(1) (levying authorities), for the definition substitute—
‘In this Act, ‘levying authority’ means—
(a) the Greater London Authority;
(b) an established mayoral authority in England;
(c) a county council or county borough council in Wales.
(3) Omit section 4(c).
(4) Omit section 7.
(5) Omit section 8.
(6) Omit section 9.
(7) In section 10, omit paragraph (2)(c) and subsections (10) and (11).
(8) In Schedule 1, omit paragraphs 19 and 20.”
This new clause would allow an established mayoral authority in England to levy a Business Rates Supplement. It would remove the ability of county and district councils in England to do so, and would remove the existing requirement for such a supplement to be approved by referendum.
New clause 64—Decisions on GLA strategy and budget: simple majority requirement—
“(1) The Greater London Authority Act 1999 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 42B (Assembly’s power to reject draft strategies), in subsection (5)(b) for ‘at least two thirds’ substitute ‘a simple majority’.
(3) In Schedule 6—
(a) in paragraph 8(4), leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority; and
(b) in paragraph 8C(4), leave out ‘at least two-thirds’ and insert ‘a simple majority.’”
This new clause would require certain decisions of the London Assembly in relation to the mayor’s strategy and GLA budget to be taken by a simple majority rather than a two-thirds majority.
New clause 65—Power of the London Assembly in relation to mayoral decisions—
“(1) The Greater London Authority Act 1999 is amended as follows.
(2) After section 59 (review and investigation) insert—
‘59A Power of the Assembly in relation to proposed mayoral decisions
(1) The powers of the assembly under this Act include—
(a) power to direct that any decision that the Mayor proposes to take is not to be taken while it is under review and scrutiny by the Assembly, and
(b) power to recommend that any decision that the Mayor proposes to take be reconsidered.
(2) The Assembly must publish details of how it proposes to exercise its powers in relation to the review and scrutiny of proposed decisions and its arrangements in connection with the exercise of those powers.
(3) Before complying subsection (2), the Assembly must obtain the consent of the Mayor to the proposals and arrangements.
(4) In the proposals and arrangements published under subsection (2), the Assembly may make provision to require the Mayor to submit to the Assembly details of any decision the Mayor proposes to take.
(5) Provision under subsection (4) may include provision for deadlines by which any such details should be submitted to the Assembly.’”
This new clause would give the London Assembly the power to direct that proposed decisions of the Mayor are not taken while under the Assembly’s review and scrutiny. It would also give the Assembly power to recommend that the Mayor reconsider a proposed decision.
New clause 66—Consultation on GLA reform—
“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of this Act being passed, carry out a consultation on potential reforms to the Greater London Authority.
(2) The report must examine as a potential reform the scope for greater direct engagement with elected representatives of the London Borough Councils in decisions made by the Greater London Authority.
(3) The Secretary of State must, within nine months of this Act being passed, lay before each House of Parliament a report setting out the findings of the consultation.”
This new clause would require the Secretary of State to consult on proposed reforms to the London Assembly, including proposals for greater involvement of London Borough representatives in GLA decisions.
New clause 70—Duty to confer ESMA powers on Cornwall Council—
“(1) This section applies where Cornwall Council has applied to the Secretary of State for a power available to an established mayoral strategic authority in or under any Act of Parliament (a “relevant power”) to be conferred upon it.
(2) On receipt of an application, the Secretary of State must make regulations to confer the relevant power upon Cornwall Council.
(3) Where a relevant power has been conferred, any reference in or under any Act of Parliament to the exercise of the power by the mayor of an established strategic authority should be read to allow the exercise of the power by the leader of Cornwall Council.
(4) Regulations under this section are subject to the negative procedure.”
This new clause would allow Cornwall Council to apply to the Secretary of State to be conferred ESMA powers and requires the Secretary of State to make regulations to that end upon receipt of such an application.
New clause 71—Requirement to establish and consult neighbourhood area committees—
“(1) The Secretary of State may not make an order or regulations under any Act of Parliament to establish, expand or confer functions on any strategic authority until the Secretary of State is satisfied that the strategic authority will, at the moment of establishment, expansion or conferral of functions, have in place—
(a) neighbourhood area committees which collectively cover the whole area of the strategic authority,
(b) mechanisms to ensure that the neighbourhood area committees are consulted on any decision the strategic authority may take that might affect the area covered by the neighbourhood area committee.
(2) A neighbourhood area committee must ensure that, when consulted by a strategic authority under subsection (1)(b), it responds to the consultation in accordance with any reasonable deadline set by the strategic authority.”
New clause 72—Visitor levies (No. 2)—
“(1) Within one year beginning with the day on which this Act is passed, the Secretary of State must by regulations make provision enabling established mayoral strategic authorities to impose a levy charged on the purchase of overnight accommodation.
(2) Following consultation, regulations under this section must—
(a) define the basis on which the levy is to be calculated;
(b) specify the process and consultation requirements for an area seeking to impose a scheme;
(c) set out reporting requirements for relevant businesses and mayoral strategic authorities; and
(d) specify the investigatory powers and penalties available to mayoral strategic authorities for the enforcement of a scheme.
(3) Regulations under this section are subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.”
This new clause would require the Secretary of State to consult on, and subsequently make, regulations enabling established mayoral strategic authorities to impose a tourism levy on overnight accommodation.
New clause 74—Power of mayors and local authorities to regulate advertising—
“(1) Within six months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, the Secretary of State must make regulations to enable mayors and local authorities to carry out functions relating to the display of advertising.
(2) Such regulations must—
(a) transfer or otherwise provide for the exercise of powers under section 220 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to mayors and local authorities; and
(b) provide that such functions include—
(i) a duty to consider the impact of advertisements on public health, and
(ii) the regulation of content of advertisements deemed to have an adverse impact on local health or likely to exacerbate inequalities in health outcomes.
(3) Regulations under this section may amend provision made by or under an Act passed—
(a) before this Act, or
(b) later in the same session of Parliament as this Act.
(4) Regulations under this section are subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.”
This new clause would provide mayors and local authorities with the power to regulate advertising, and include duties on their use of that power in relation to public health and health inequalities.
New clause 76—Duty to establish a London Combined Board—
“(1) Within six months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, the Secretary of State must by regulations establish a London Combined Board (“the Board”).
(2) Regulations under this section must—
(a) specify the Membership of the Board as—
(i) the Mayor of London, and
(ii) the membership of the Executive Committee of London Councils;
(b) make provision about joint decision-making between the GLA and the Board, including in relation to—
(i) powers exercised by the GLA on behalf of any London borough;
(ii) funding devolved to the GLA;
(iii) governance of any integrated settlement for London.
(3) In making regulations under this section, the Secretary of State must consider—
(a) existing best practice cooperation within other combined authorities in England, and
(b) existing cooperation between the GLA and London boroughs.
(4) Regulations under this section are subject to affirmative resolution procedure.”
This new clause would require the Secretary of State to establish a London Combined Board to ensure cooperation and joint decision-making between the GLA and representatives from London borough councils.
New clause 77—Proposals for alternative models for devolution—
“(1) One or more leaders of any strategic authority may notify the Secretary of State of—
(a) any changes to the boundaries and structures of a strategic authority;
(b) any changes to the governance of strategic authorities, including the relationship between a strategic authority and any local authority within its area; and
(c) any other changes to the structure of local devolution in its area
which the leaders believe would contribute to securing the effective exercise of functions either by the strategic authority, or by any local authority within its area.
(2) Before making any notification under subsection (1), the relevant strategic authority must consult—
(a) local authorities within its area;
(b) representatives of the community within its area, including businesses, education providers, health providers, and civil society, and
(c) any other persons that the strategic authority considers expedient.
(3) The Secretary of State must respond to a notification given under this section within three months beginning on the day on which it is submitted to the Secretary of State.
(4) A strategic authority may publish a notification made under this section, and the Secretary of State may publish a response to any such published notification.”
New clause 78—Abolition of PCCs—
“(1) In any mayoral combined authority or mayoral CCA, within six months of the passage of this Act, the Secretary of State must make regulations to transfer all PCC functions to the mayor and abolish the PCC.
(2) Regulations under subsection (1) are subject to the affirmative procedure.”.
This new clause would require the Secretary of State to make regulations to abolish the PCC and transfer their functions to the mayor in authorities which already have a mayor.
Amendment 175, in clause 1, page 1, line 12, at end insert—
“(d) Cornwall Council.”
Amendment 176, page 2, line 6, at end insert—
“(d) Cornwall Council, notwithstanding any requirement for the authority to have a mayor.”
Amendment 91, in clause 2, page 2, line 21, after “economic development” insert “, poverty and socio-economic inequality,”.
This amendment would make poverty and socio-economic inequality an area of competence for devolved authorities, ensuring they can take action to address the root causes of disadvantage in their areas.
Amendment 37, in clause 3, page 2, line 27, leave out subsections (1) to (3) and insert—
“(1) A unitary district council or a county council may submit a proposal to the Secretary of State for designation as a single foundation strategic authority.
(2) A proposal under subsection (1) must be prepared in such form and contain such information as the Secretary of State may by regulations prescribe.
(3) The Secretary of State may by regulations designate a unitary district council as a single foundation strategic authority if—
(a) a proposal has been submitted in accordance with subsection (1), and
(b) the Secretary of State is satisfied that the designation is appropriate having regard to the need to secure effective and convenient local government in relation to the areas of competence.”
This amendment would restrict the Secretary of State's power to designate a single foundation Strategic Authority. Instead, a local authority would initiate the request by submitting a proposal to the Secretary of State.
Amendment 104, page 2, line 31, leave out from “unless” to the end of line 32 and insert
“a referendum has been held in which residents of the council have consented to the designation.”
This amendment would create a requirement for a referendum to be held prior to the Secretary of State designating a council as a strategic authority.
Amendment 53, page 2, line 32, at end insert—
“(3A) Before making a designation under this section, the Secretary of State must consult town and parish councils within the area of the proposed single foundation strategic authority.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult town and parish councils prior to the unitary district council or county council within which they are situated being designated as a single foundation strategic authority.
Amendment 61, page 2, line 32, at end insert—
“(3A) The Secretary of State must make provision to ensure councils designated as a single foundation strategic authority receives adequate funding to facilitate their transition.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to ensure that councils designated as a single foundation strategic authority receive funding to facilitate their transition.
Amendment 165, page 2, line 33, at end insert—
“(3A) The Secretary of State may not designate a council if the council’s area is within, or is, the area of a National Park unless the Secretary of State has consulted with the authority for that National Park.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult a National Park authority, if the area of a council which the Secretary of State is designating is within, or is, the area of that National Park.
Amendment 85, page 11, line 1, leave out clause 9.
This amendment would remove the Bill’s provision to grant mayors of CAs and CCAs the power to appoint commissioners to deliver policy.
Amendment 161, in clause 9, page 11, line 4, leave out “not more than 7”.
This amendment would remove the statutory cap on the number of commissioners that may be appointed by a mayoral authority.
Amendment 162, page 11, line 29, leave out “not more than 7”.
See explanatory statement for 161.
Amendment 77, in clause 19, page 23, line 6, at end insert—
“(f) funding which has been allocated to support the establishment of new strategic authorities.”
This amendment would require the annual report on devolution to include an account of funding provided to support the establishment of new strategic authorities.
Amendment 79, page 23, line 6, at end insert—
“(f) progress with the implementation of the strategy provided for in section [Duty to publish and implement a forward devolution strategy].”
This amendment is consequential on NC24.
Amendment 39, in clause 21, page 24, line 4, leave out subsection (b) and insert—
“(b) one or more of the following—
(i) health and social care;
(ii) planning;
(iii) environmental concerns;
(iv) funding;
(v) sustainability measures;
(vi) education;
(vii) transport provision and
(viii) green and community spaces.”
This amendment ensures that mayors must consider specific community matters when consulting with local partners.
Amendment 27, in clause 40, page 41, line 11 , at end insert—
“(2A) In section 144, after subsection (1) insert—
‘(1A) In exercising powers under subsection (1) the relevant authority must engage with town and parish council within its area.
(1B) Engagement under subsection (1A) must include—
(a) consulting town and parish councils on tourism strategies, policies, and investment priorities; and
(b) creating opportunities for town and parish councils to contribute to activities relating to the exercising powers under subsection (1).
(1C) In exercising powers under subsection (1) the relevant authority must publish a report summarising the authority’s engagement with town and parish councils which includes—
(a) form of engagement used;
(b) the views of town and parish councils on the authority’s exercise of powers under subsection (1); and
(c) the role of town and parish councils in exercising powers under subsection (1).
(1D) The Secretary of State may issue guidance regarding requirements for engagement under subsection (1A).’”
This amendment would require local and/or strategic authorities exercising powers to encourage visitors to their area to engage with town and parish councils.
Amendment 75, in clause 43, page 44, line 21, at end insert—
“(2A) The Secretary of State has a duty to ensure that a combined authority has sufficient financial resources and adequate administrative support the duties in subsections (1) and (2).
(2B) In discharging the duty under subsection (2A), the Secretary of State must regularly review the financial and administrative needs of a combined authority insofar as they relate to the needs described in subsection (1).”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to review the financial and administrative needs of combined authorities with regard to reducing health inequalities in their areas.
Government amendment 116.
Amendment 92, in clause 43, page 44, line 31, leave out “prosperity” and insert “poverty and socio-economic inequality”.
This amendment is linked to Amendment 93 which would ensure that the health improvement and health inequalities duty focuses explicitly on tackling poverty and socio-economic inequality, rather than using the broader term “prosperity”.
Amendment 72, page 44, line 36 , at end insert—
“(e) nitrogen dioxide level and general air quality,”.
This amendment would include air quality as a general health determinant which combined authorities must consider in their duty to reduce health inequalities.
Amendment 87, page 44, line 36, at end insert—
“(e) access to green space and nature,
(f) exposure to environmental harms, including air pollution, water pollution, land pollution, and any other form of environmental pollution,”.
This amendment would expand the list of general health determinants for the purposes of the new health improvement and health inequalities duty as it applies to CCAs, so it includes access to green space; and exposure to environmental harm.
Amendment 88, page 45, line 3, at end insert—
“(5A) In subsection (5)(e), the reference to “green space and nature” includes—
(a) any multifunctional green and blue space, and
(b) any urban or rural natural feature,
that is considered to deliver any environmental, economic, health and wellbeing benefits for communities and nature.”
This amendment is consequential on Amendment 87 and describes “green space and nature” for the purpose of this section.
Amendment 172, page 45, line 11, at end insert—
“107ZBA health inequalities strategy
(1) Each strategic authority must prepare and publish a health inequalities strategy setting out how it will operationalise the duty under section 107ZB.
(2) The strategy may be a standalone document or incorporated within another statutory or strategic plan of the authority.
(3) The strategy must promote health improvement and the reduction of health inequalities between persons living in the strategic authority area.
(4) In preparing the strategy, an authority must have regard to relevant national and local strategies relating to health improvement and the reduction of health inequalities.
(5) The strategy must set locally appropriate targets and policies designed to meet them, set for the end of a 10- year period beginning on the day on which the strategy is published.
(6) The metrics may include, but need not be limited to metrics relating to—
(a) healthy life expectancy,
(b) infant mortality rate, and
(c) poverty (including the child poverty rate).
(7) The strategic authority must, once every five years, alongside its local growth plan, produce and make publicly available a report on progress against the strategy.”
Amendment 76, page 45, line 21, at end insert—
“(2A) The Secretary of State has a duty to ensure that a CCA has sufficient financial resources and adequate administrative support to have regard to the needs described in subsection (1).
(2B) In discharging the duty under subsection (2A), the Secretary of State must regularly review the financial and administrative needs of a CCA insofar as they relate to the needs described in subsection (1).”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to review the financial and administrative needs of CCAs with regard to reducing health inequalities in their areas.
Government amendment 117.
Amendment 93, page 45, line 31, leave out “prosperity” and insert “poverty and socio-economic inequality”.
This amendment is linked to Amendment 92 which would ensure that the health improvement and health inequalities duty focuses explicitly on tackling poverty and socio-economic inequality, rather than using the broader term “prosperity”.
Amendment 73, page 45, line 36, at end insert—
“(e) nitrogen dioxide level and general air quality,”.
This amendment would include air quality as a general health determinant which CCAs must consider in their duty to reduce health inequalities.
Amendment 89, page 45, line 36, at end insert—
“(e) access to green space and nature,
(f) exposure to environmental harms, including air pollution, water pollution, land pollution, and any other form of environmental pollution,”.
This amendment would expand the list of general health determinants for the purposes of the new health improvement and health inequalities duty as it applies to CCAs, so it includes access to green space; and exposure to environmental harm.
Amendment 90, page 45, line 39, at end insert—
“(5A) In subsection (5)(e), the reference to ‘green space and nature’ includes—
(a) any multifunctional green and blue space, and
(b) any urban or rural natural feature,
that is considered to deliver any environmental, economic, health and wellbeing benefits for communities and nature.”
This amendment is consequential on Amendment 87 and describes “green space and nature” for the purpose of this section.
Government amendment 118.
Amendment 47, in clause 45, page 50, line 31, at end insert—
“(c) a draft of any such order is subject to the affirmative procedure.”
This amendment would ensure that regulations made by the Secretary of State to alter the size of PCC areas when transferring powers of PCCs to strategic authorities receive parliamentary scrutiny.
Amendment 48, in clause 46, page 53, line 43, at end insert—
“(7) Regulations made under this section are subject to the affirmative procedure.”
This amendment would ensure that regulations made by the Secretary of State regarding the functions of fire and rescue authorities receive parliamentary scrutiny.
Amendment 40, in clause 49, page 55, line 15, leave out subsection (3) and insert—
“(3) Where a notification under subsection (1) is given, the Secretary of State must, within the period of six months beginning with the day on which the notification is given, give effect to the change or changes proposed by the mayor or mayors.
(4) Effect may be given under subsection (3) by means of regulations made by statutory instrument.
(5) A statutory instrument made under subsection (4) is —
(a) subject to the affirmative procedure if it—
(i) amends an Act of Parliament, or
(ii) confers or modifies a function which relates to an area of competence;
(b) where neither of the conditions in paragraph (a) apply, subject to the negative procedure.”
This amendment creates a statutory duty on the Secretary of State to seek parliamentary approval before implementing mayoral requests for greater powers over funding or legal changes.
Amendment 36, page 55, line 21, at end insert—
“(4) No decision under subsection (3) may be implemented unless—
(a) the Secretary of State has made regulations giving effect to the decision,
(b) a statutory instrument containing the regulations has been laid before and approved by both Houses of Parliament, and
(c) save as where provided for otherwise, regulations giving effect to any decision made under section are subject to the affirmative procedure.”
This amendment would require any decision of the Secretary of State following a request from a local authority to be implemented by statutory instrument subject to the affirmative procedure.
Government new schedule 1—Charges payable by undertakers executing works in maintainable highways.
Government new schedule 2—Licensing functions of the Mayor of London.
Amendment 8, in schedule 1, page 81, line 15, leave out subparagraph (b).
This amendment, and Amendments 9 to 15, remove the ability of the Secretary of State to create, or make certain changes to the governance or composition of, combined authorities without consent of the councils involved.
Amendment 9, page 81, line 33, leave out subparagraph (b).
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 10, page 82, line 18, leave out “subsections (3) to (5)” and insert “subsection (3)”.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 11, page 83, line 6, leave out paragraph 8.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 12, page 83, line 8, leave out paragraph 9.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 13, page 84, line 36, leave out paragraph 16.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 169, page 85, line 10, at end insert—
“(3A) The proposal does not include Cornwall Council, or any area under the authority of Cornwall Council.”.
This amendment would prevent the Secretary of State from making a proposal to establish a combined authority which includes Cornwall or any area under the authority of Cornwall Council.
Amendment 54, page 85, line 27, at end insert—
“(6A) The Secretary of State must consult town and parish councils within the proposed new combined authority area.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult town and parish councils prior to proposing a new combined authority in the area in which they are situated.
Amendment 166, page 85, line 27, at end insert—
“(6A) If the proposed area is within, or is, the area of a National Park the Secretary of State must consult with the authority for that National Park.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult a National Park authority, if the proposed area for a new combined authority is within, or is, the area of that National Park.
Amendment 170, page 85, line 40, at end insert—
“(1A) The order does not include Cornwall Council, or any area under the authority of Cornwall Council”.
This amendment would prevent the Secretary of State from making an order to establish a combined authority which includes Cornwall or any area under the authority of Cornwall Council.
Amendment 105, page 86, line 28, at end insert—
“(7A) A referendum has been held in which residents of the proposed combined authority have consented to the area being established as a combined authority.”
This amendment would create a requirement for a referendum to be held prior to the Secretary of State making an order to establish a combined authority.
Amendment 62, page 86, line 37, at end insert—
“(8A) The Secretary of State must make provision to ensure the combined authority receives adequate funding to facilitate its establishment.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to ensure that combined authorities receive adequate funding to facilitate their establishment.
Amendment 14, page 88, line 14, leave out paragraph 19.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 50, page 88, line 20, at end insert—
“(1A) The Secretary of State has obtained consent for the proposal from any affected local government area.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to obtain consent from all affected areas in preparing a proposal to add a local government area to an existing area of a combined county authority.
Amendment 171, page 88, line 20, at end insert—
“(1A) The proposal does not include Cornwall Council, or any area under the authority of Cornwall Council”.
This amendment would prevent the Secretary of State from making a proposal to add a local government area to an existing area of a combined authority if the area in the proposal includes Cornwall or any area under the authority of Cornwall Council.
Amendment 167, page 88, line 41, at end insert—
“(5A) If the proposed local government area or existing area is within, or is, the area of a National Park the Secretary of State must consult with the authority for that National Park.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult a National Park authority, if the local government area or existing area the Secretary of State proposes to merge is within, or is, the area of that National Park.
Amendment 55, page 89, line 2, after “to” insert “and thereafter consult with”.
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult with any of the relevant councils and persons given notice that an area is being proposed to be added to an existing combined authority.
Amendment 56, page 89, line 9, at end insert—
“(da) any town and parish councils whose area would be added to the area of the combined authority, and”.
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult local councils prior to proposing the area in which they are situated is added to an existing combined authority.
Amendment 51, page 89, leave out from beginning of line 25 to end of line 12 on page 90.
This amendment would remove the Bill’s provision for the Secretary of State to have powers to prepare a proposal for there to be a mayor for the area of an existing combined authority.
Amendment 15, page 90, line 13, leave out paragraph 20.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 8.
Amendment 16, page 94, line 36, leave out subparagraph (b).
This amendment, and Amendments 16 to 21, remove the ability of the Secretary of State to create, or make certain changes to the governance or composition of, combined county authorities without the consent of the councils involved.
Amendment 17, page 95, line 21, leave out subparagraph (b).
See explanatory statement for Amendment 15.
Amendment 18, page 97, line 10, leave out paragraph 33.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 15.
Amendment 19, page 97, line 12, leave out paragraph 34.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 15.
Amendment 52, page 98, line 22, leave out paragraphs 37 and 38.
This amendment would remove the Bill’s provision for the Secretary of State to have powers to prepare a proposal for the establishment of a CCA without a public consultation.
Amendment 20, page 98, line 34, leave out paragraph 38.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 15.
Amendment 164, page 99, line 27, at end insert—
“(6A) If the proposed area is within, or is, the area of a National Park the Secretary of State must consult with the authority for that National Park.”
This amendment would require the Secretary of State to consult a National Park authority, if the proposed area for a CCA is within, or is, the area of that National Park.
Amendment 106, page 100, line 26, at end insert—
“(7A) A referendum has been held in which residents of the proposed CCA have consented to the area being established as a CCA.”
This amendment would create a requirement for a referendum to be held prior to the Secretary of State making regulations to establish a CCA.
Amendment 21, page 102, line 16, leave out paragraph 41.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 15.
Amendment 22, page 104, line 13, leave out paragraph 42.
See explanatory statement for Amendment 15.
Amendment 86, page 112, line 1, leave out Schedule 3.
This amendment is consequential on Amendment 85.
Amendment 163, in schedule 3, page 113, leave out lines 1 to 32.
This amendment removes restrictions limiting appointments by mayors to one commissioner per competence.
Government amendments 122 to 124.
Amendment 24, page 117, line 25, at end insert—
“(2A) The relevant remuneration panel may not recommend allowances which exceed the amount paid in salary to a person employed at director level within the relevant authority.”
This amendment ensures that Commissioners cannot be paid more than Directors working for the authority.
Amendment 151, page 120, line 32, at end insert
“or,—
(c) prevent the commissioner from operating collaboratively with other commissioners across different areas of competence, recognising that the work of commissioners will often intersect and benefit from integrated working with a spatial lens to meet the needs of, and drive positive outcomes for specific places as a whole.”
This amendment broadens the scope of paragraph 4 of this Schedule to ensure that commissioners appointed by the mayor for the area of a combined authority are not only permitted to work incidentally across areas of competence but are also encouraged to do so collaboratively and with a spatial, place-based perspective.
Government amendments 125 to 134.
Amendment 23, in schedule 5, page 136, line 11, at end insert—
“(3) The regulations must include a requirement for the license holder to maintain sufficient docking space for the micromobility vehicles for which they hold a license.
(4) The regulations must include requirements for license holders which would require them to ensure that the micromobility vehicles for which they hold a license do not obstruct any highway, cycling path, footpath, bridlepath, or subway.
(5) The regulations must stipulate that failure of license holders to comply with subsections (3) and (4) will warrant a loss of license.”
This amendment would require that regulations ensure that license holders for micromobility vehicles are responsible for maintaining sufficient docking space for their vehicle and ensuring their vehicle does not obstruct any highways or public paths, or else lose their license.
Government amendment 137.
Amendment 35, in schedule 7, page 146, line 22, at end insert—
‘3 “(1) Part 1 of Schedule 7 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 is amended as follows.
(2) After paragraph (4) insert—
4A “(1) There is a parking contravention in England if a person causes an obstruction which, without lawful authority or excuse, causes or permits a motor vehicle to stand on a pavement in such a manner as to wilfully obstruct free passage along the pavement.
(2) A parking contravention under subparagraph (1) is a civil offence which may be enforced by the local authority in which the contravention has occurred.
(3) The relevant local authority under subparagraph (2) may issue penalty charges for a civil offence under subsection (2).
(4) The amount for a penalty charge under subparagraph (3) shall be determined by regulations made by the Secretary of State.
(5) Regulations under subparagraph (4) may specify different penalty charge amounts based on—
(a) the obstructing vehicle class,
(b) the area of the local authority in which the obstruction has occurred, or
(c) any other relevant circumstantial consideration.
(6) In this paragraph—
(a) “motor vehicle” has the meaning given in section 136 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, and
(b) “pavement” has the meaning given in section 72 of the Highway Act 1835.
4B (1) Penalty charge amounts for parking contraventions under this Part may be set by the relevant local authority.
(2) Amounts under subparagraph (1) must align with provisions under section 77 of this Act.
(3) Amounts under subparagraph (1) must have regard to any regulations made under section 87 of this Act.
(4) Amounts under subparagraph (1) must be published by the local authority and may be revised from time to time.”’
This amendment would allow local authorities to enforce obstructive pavement parking within their areas as a civil offence and devolves the power to set parking penalty charge amounts for all parking penalty charge offences to local authorities.
Amendment 74, in schedule 7, page 146, line 22, insert—
‘3 “(1) After Paragraph 10 of Schedule 8 to the Traffic Management Act 2004, insert—
“Exercise of functions relating to civil enforcement
11 Any functions related to civil enforcement described by this schedule must be exercised directly by—
(a) the elected mayor for the area of an authority, or
(b) a member of an authority who is an elected member of a constituent council.”’
This amendment ensures civil enforcement powers, when exercised by CAs and CCAs, must be under the direction of elected officials.
Government amendments 138 to 144.
Amendment 25, in schedule 12, page 174, line 24, at end insert—
“61DCB Density requirement
(1) A strategic authority issuing a mayoral development order must prioritise applications which—
(a) will deliver greater density in urban areas,
(b) are located in areas with greater public transportation accessibility according to the indices established by subsection (2), or
(c) if located within the Greater London Authority, are located in areas with a Transport for London Public Transport Accessibility level equal or greater than Level 4.
(2) A strategic authority must create ‘public transport accessibility index’ to categorise areas within the authority based on their proximity to public transportation.
(3) A strategic authority must issue a mayoral development order for any land which has been previously developed.”
This amendment would require mayoral development orders (MDOs) to prioritise planning applications in areas of high urban density and public transport accessibility, and would require MDOs to be issued for previously developed land.
Government amendments 145 and 146.
Amendment 71, page 175, line 22 at end insert—
“(ba) After subsection (1BB), insert—
“(1BBA) When exercising any power under this section, the mayor of a relevant authority must ensure—
(a) any plans received comply with any Strategic Spatial Energy Plan for the area, and
(b) any plans comply with any Land Use Framework applicable to the area”.’
This amendment requires mayors to ensure that when making decisions relating to planning applications, the planning applications have regard to any Strategic Spatial Energy Plan and, or Land Use Framework in place for the area.
Government amendments 147 to 149.
Amendment 26, in schedule 17, page 207, line 27, at end insert—
“7A After section 202, insert—
‘202A: restrictions on designation of greenfield land
Where an MDC exercises any functions in relation to the designation of land for development, the MDC must not designate any development on greenfield land unless there is no available land that has not previously been developed.’”
Amendment 69, page 210, line 12, leave out from “that” to end of line 13 and insert
“the majority of members of an MDC are elected members of relevant councils”.
This amendment would require that the make-up of Mayoral Development Corporation boards must have a majority of members from constituent councils.
Amendment 65, in schedule 19, page 214, line 30, at end insert—
“(d) comply with any Land Use Framework issued by the Secretary of State, and
(e) comply with any local nature recovery strategies applicable to the area covered by the authority.
(2A) The Secretary of State must take steps to support a mayoral combined authority in complying with the provisions of paragraphs (2)(d) and (2)(e) of this section.”
This amendment requires mayoral combined authorities to ensure their local growth plans comply with any overarching Land Use Framework and relevant local nature recovery strategies.
Amendment 80, page 214, line 30, at end insert—
“(d) identify the plan’s contribution to targets set out by—
(i) sections 1 to 3 of the Environment Act 2021,
(ii) Part 1 of the Climate Change Act 2008, and
(iii) the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010.”
This amendment would require combined authorities to have regard to targets set by the Environment Act 2021, Climate Change Act 2008, and Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 in developing local growth plans.
Amendment 159, page 214, line 30, at end insert—
“(2A) The mayoral combined authority must include amongst the projects identified measures that will promote growth through the safeguarding and promotion of existing cultural, creative, and community infrastructure such as grassroots music venues, theatres and other live performance spaces.”
Amendment 173, page 214, line 30, at end insert—
“(d) take account of the statutory health duty and health inequalities strategy prepared by the strategic authority, and
(e) promote community wealth building, cooperatives, mutuals and the wider social economy as mechanisms to narrow health inequalities.”
Amendment 174, page 214, line 30, at end insert—
“(2A) In preparing a local growth plan, a mayoral combined authority must make specific reference to the proposed benefits of the plan on areas which are rural, remote, or coastal.”
This amendment would require local growth plans to make specific reference to the proposed benefits of the plan on rural, remote and coastal areas.
Amendment 83, page 215, line 19, at end insert—
“107MA Funding and support relating for local growth plans
‘(1) The Secretary of State has a duty to ensure that mayoral combined authorities have sufficient financial resources and adequate administrative support to discharge effectively any functions relating to the—
(a) preparation,
(b) publication, and
(c) delivery
of local growth plans.
(2) In discharging the duty under subsection (1), the Secretary of State must regularly review the financial and administrative needs of mayoral combined authorities in respect of functions relating to local growth plans, taking into account the—
(a) strategic importance, and
(b) complexity
of any such plans.’.”
This amendment creates a requirement for regular reviews of the needs of mayoral combined authorities with regard to local growth plans.
Amendment 66, page 216, line 29, at end insert—
“(d) comply with any Land Use Framework applicable to the area covered by the authority, and
(e) comply with any local nature recovery strategies applicable to the area covered by the authority.”
“(2A) The Secretary of State must make provision to support a mayoral CCA in complying with the provisions of paragraphs (2)(d) and (2)(e) of this section.”
This amendment requires mayoral CCAs to ensure their local growth plans comply with any overarching Land Use Framework and relevant local nature recovery strategies.
Amendment 81, page 216, line 29, at end insert—
“(d) identify the plan’s contribution to targets set out by—
(i) sections 1 to 3 of the Environment Act 2021,
(ii) Part 1 of the Climate Change Act 2008, and
(iii) the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010.”
This amendment would require combined authorities to have regard to targets set by the Environment Act 2021, Climate Change Act 2008, and Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 in developing local growth plans.
Amendment 160, page 216, line 29, at end insert—
“(2A) The mayoral CCA must include amongst the projects identified measures that will promote growth through the safeguarding and promotion of existing cultural, creative, and community infrastructure such as grassroots music venues, theatres and other live performance spaces.”
Amendment 84, page 217, line 15, at end insert—
“32BA Funding and support relating to local growth plans
(1) The Secretary of State has a duty to ensure that mayoral CCAs have sufficient financial resources and adequate administrative support to discharge effectively any functions relating to the—
(a) preparation,
(b) publication, and
(c) delivery
of local growth plans.
(2) In discharging the duty under subsection (1), the Secretary of State must regularly review the financial and administrative needs of mayoral CCAs in respect of functions relating to local growth plans, taking into account the—
(a) strategic importance, and
(b) complexity
of any such plans.”
This amendment creates a requirement for regular reviews of the needs of mayoral CCAs with regard to local growth plans.
Amendment 49, in schedule 21, page 224, leave out lines 6 to 12.
This amendment would remove the provision to allow mayors to appoint a person to manage policing and crime for their area.
Government amendments 112, 135, 136 and 113.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I am delighted to bring the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill back to the House on Report. Before I go any further, I would like to place on the record my gratitude to Members from across the House for their continued engagement on this Bill, and in particular to the Chairs and members of the Public Bill Committee for their diligent and thoughtful contributions to line-by-line scrutiny.
This Bill will secure the biggest transfer of power out of Whitehall to our regions and communities in a generation. At its heart is the principle that if we take power out of Westminster and Whitehall and place it in the hands of local leaders and communities who know their patch, we can unlock the economic potential of places, revive communities that have been held back for too long, and deliver for people in the places where they live, raise a family and work.
We will provide mayors and their strategic authorities with new powers over planning, housing, transport and regeneration so that they can get Britain building and unleash the economic potential of their areas. We will reform and rebuild local government so that it can once again deliver good local services that people can rely on, and we will empower local communities to shape their places so that they can drive the change they want to see on their doorstep.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a statement on the action we are taking to restore pride in place. Britain’s renewal is a driving mission of this Labour Government, and we know that that must be seen, felt and heard in every single neighbourhood. Our identity, sense of patriotism and feeling of belonging can all depend on the condition of our local area and the view from our doorstep.
Our neighbourhoods are the nation’s barometer for whether all of us in this House are doing our jobs. Under 14 years of Conservative failure, the needle of that barometer has increasingly pointed in the wrong direction. The effect of this decline in pride in place has been corrosive. It has eroded people’s trust in politics and the state, created a sense of unfairness and that some places have fared better than others, and opened the door to the plastic patriots in the Reform party, who say that there is a simple answer. Let me say from the start that we are under no illusions about the complex causes of, and answers to, this decline.
The failure of the Conservatives properly to fund local government, the sharp transition away from industry and the broken Tory promises of levelling up must shoulder part of the blame. We cannot and will not pretend that the legacies of any of those issues can be reversed overnight, but, as both a Labour Government and a Parliament, we can be confident that the way in which we restore pride in place lies not in this Chamber or the corridors of Whitehall; the answer is in the communities that we each represent.
Our job is to give our constituents the investment and powers that they need, so that they can deliver the change they want to see in their communities. That is why we have announced the pride in place programme, backed up by £5 billion. This is a priority for the Prime Minister, choosing renewal over decline and unity over division. This is our plan for change in action, giving power and pride back to the people who make Britain great.
There are two categories of investment. The first, the main programme, is the flagship pride in place programme, which will provide up to £20 million of funding and support to each area over the course of a decade, focused on specific neighbourhoods. Communities will need to decide how that funding is spent. We will establish a neighbourhood board in every place, made up of local people. Residents, business owners and community leaders will come together alongside their Member of Parliament to come up with a 10-year plan for this investment. They could choose to bring a derelict pub back into use for the community, transform a boarded-up shop into a wellbeing hub, improve local transport links, create a new playground or roll out a community-level service to help with the cost of living. Local people know best what change is needed.
This programme is about local communities taking back control. As long as the plan provides value for money, the board will have our full support to deliver the change that the community needs. We are taking inspiration from the new deal for communities, which, under the last Labour Government, put local communities in charge of renewing their neighbourhoods, but we are also adapting to the world as we find it today and learning the lessons of what did and did not work from the last time around.
The second programme, the pride in place impact fund, will provide a short-term injection of £1.5 million per place. It will be delivered by local authorities for the most immediate results in three phases: community spaces, public spaces and high streets and town centre revitalisation. Despite the shorter timeframe of the fund, there is still an important emphasis on local collaboration. We will ask local communities to work closely with MPs and local authorities to ensure that investment decisions reflect local priorities and community needs. Our economic situation means that we are not in a position to cover everywhere that would benefit from this programme. We have therefore prioritised places with the highest level of need—those places that have been left behind and let down, and those communities that were hollowed out over 14 years of Conservative austerity, for which the Conservatives should hang their heads in shame.
It is important to this Labour Government that every community has the power to renew their area, so alongside this investment we have published the pride in place strategy. The purpose of the strategy is to promote the same principle of community power across the entire country, and it centres on three aims.
The first aim, building stronger communities, means bringing people together. We see that as the foundation for a greater sense of belonging and local pride. When people spend time with each other in their community, including those from different backgrounds, they see that they have more in common than separates them. This sense of shared endeavour means that communities are more likely to take steps to improve their local area. As part of that, we will fund locally led interventions to build community resilience, encouraging volunteers through co-produced policies, and tackle loneliness. We recognise that that can be delivered only by a whole-of-Government approach, so this section of the strategy includes policies from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Home Office.
The second aim, creating thriving places, is how we promote pride in place in the most direct sense: by improving how the public realm looks. As a Government, we see a direct link between the declining appearance of our local neighbourhoods and how people feel about not just their immediate area, but the country and the world around them. We acknowledge that the performance of the public realm is often a reflection of the economy and the work of local authorities, which is why we are focused on growth and on fixing the foundations of local government, but even in times when the economy has been strong and local government was funded properly, the effects have not always been felt in the public realm. Fixing that disconnect is the inspiration for policies to encourage the application of shopfront design guides as well as the use of clean-up powers. What links all the policies in this section of the paper is that they empower our communities to create thriving places. This is not an attempt to micromanage change from Whitehall.
The final strand, helping communities to take back control of their own lives and areas, sets out our plan to give people a stronger voice in what matters to them. Each of us in the House will have spoken to constituents who talk of helplessness, when the place that they live in is changing in ways that they did not ask for and that they feel they have no control over. Sometimes it is about antisocial behaviour on their estate; other times, it is about the shops being lost from the high street. People want to be in control of their surroundings, but that is such a distant concept when they do not feel safe going out at night or do not have a say over how their town centre looks.
A lot of those feelings stem from the effects of the Conservative Government’s 14 years of austerity, which took libraries and leisure centres from some of the most deprived and disadvantaged communities. When combined with the closure of pubs, sports clubs and social clubs, it means that for much of the country there are fewer and fewer places for people to come together and take pride in. We are therefore introducing a community right to buy, to give local residents new powers to save treasured assets; giving more people a say in their local economy by creating a new co-operative development unit in my Department; and requiring all authorities in England to establish effective neighbourhood governance.
This Labour Government’s pride in place programme is an investment in the UK’s future, backing the true patriots who build up our communities across every corner of the country. Alongside our strategy, it aims to spark a new way of governing, where power and resources are more readily shared with our communities. However, like devolution, this needs to be the start of a process rather than a single event. We have specifically designed both investment programmes with a guaranteed role for local Members of Parliament, so I finish by encouraging Members from across the House to get involved. At a time when trust is low and the demand for change is high, this is an opportunity for all of us to make a real, tangible difference to our communities by giving real power to those we are elected to serve.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I am disappointed by the hon. Member’s lack of contrition and his failure to say sorry. The Conservatives presided over 14 years of failure, during which, over a period of austerity, local government and local civic institutions were denuded and deprived communities were hollowed out. He says that we are funding areas of deprivation—that is because we actually care about funding those areas. Candidly, if I had the record of the last Government, I would not stand at the Dispatch Box and give us lectures.
Let me pick up the specific questions that the hon. Member asked. First, why are we tying this up in process? There is no process, but we have said that communities should be in charge. The difference between this scheme and the things done by the last Government is that we want to put communities in the driving seat and give them power. We want local authorities to enable and facilitate, but we absolutely need our community leaders. Members across the House will know them—the people who are networking, championing and making change happen. We want them around the table, driving the change that their community needs.
On the methodology, the Conservative party obviously did some fiddling, but we do not do that. We have focused on two metrics: multiple deprivation and community needs. That is putting investment into the areas that most need it, because they are both deprived and, critically, have low social infrastructure and social capital. That is why we are funding the areas that we are funding. We all remember the Conservatives’ last Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), saying that they actively diverted funding away from areas of deprivation. That is something that the Labour party will not do and has not done.
Finally, turning to the funding profile, we are desperate to move with momentum. We want to get the investment out. It is a 10-year commitment—that is an absolute game changer. No Government have ever said to communities, “Come up with an investment plan and we will fund you over a decade.” We think that is game changing for communities on the ground, but we are not going to wait. We are already giving programme capital investment to the 75 places that were in phase 1, in order to start the work of kick-starting that programme, and then their funding will flow next year. For those places in phase 2, capital and capacity investment will be going into them from next year and then flowing in the year after. We are very clear about this opportunity for our communities.
This is not about party politics, so I am incredibly disappointed by the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds). This is an opportunity to support parts of our country that have been absolutely hollowed out. I would expect a bit more contrition. [Hon. Members: “Why?”] Because of your record. Because you sat—
Order. “Because of your record”? My record? “Because of you”? Me? Let us temper our language, lower the temperature and continue.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. Because of the Conservatives’ record, I would expect a little bit more contrition.
We are focused on the task ahead, which is the opportunity to drive change in our communities. I hope Members across the House can join us in that endeavour.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
My hon. Friend is completely right—levelling up was a hollow slogan. We see from the record that there was no substance behind it. Unlike the Conservative party, we are doing the job of investing in our communities, putting them in the driving seat. That will be a game changer in constituencies such as my hon. Friend’s.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
We are not able to fund all areas—I wish we were—so we have focused on particular areas of deprivation that also score high on the community needs index. However, we are also putting in place a whole set of powers and provisions so that every community can take control of its high streets and other areas, and can use the community right to buy. I am very happy to meet the hon. Member and other Cornwall Members to talk about how we can ensure that that part of the country thrives.
I will try again. Dr Lauren Sullivan will show us how it is done.
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
I welcome the Minister to her place. I thank her for Gravesham’s share of the pride in place impact fund; £1.5 million over two years is a really great investment, so that we can restart building communities and place—and there are new possibilities that once could only have been imagined. These priorities have been neglected over many years. Does she agree with me that the impact fund will make a real difference to Gravesham?
Correction twice—it is not “Can you make a comment?” Let us please make sure we get our words right next time around.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
We are working very closely with the Northern Ireland Office, which is in constant contact with the Northern Ireland Executive in terms of pride in place and community investment, and local growth investment more widely. We will be working closely with them and ensuring that we are engaging with, and trying to design this with, the Northern Ireland Executive.
(5 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
With permission, I wish to make a statement on the action we are taking to cut energy bills for working families.
Three years on from the Russian invasion of Ukraine which sent prices soaring, people up and down the country are still feeling the impacts. Everywhere I go in this job and from every person I speak to, I hear how the wages that used to support families are being swallowed up by sky-high energy bills month after month after month. The truth is that for as long as we remain dependent on gas and volatile global markets, British people will continue to pay the price and we will continue to be held back as a country. That is why we are finally ending our exposure and our vulnerability by sprinting to clean, affordable energy that is controlled by us.
We know that in the meantime, we must do everything we can to support families who are under huge amounts of pressure with their energy bills. Today, we are setting out how we will help millions more households with their bills this winter by expanding the warm home discount. Previously, around 3 million people received the £150 rebate off their energy bills, but millions of people living in homes not classified as “hard to heat” were excluded as a result of criteria introduced by the previous Government in 2022. We believe those criteria were unnecessary and unreliable. We believe that it cannot be fair to have two families in almost exactly the same circumstances, with one receiving help and one not. That has been raised repeatedly by consumers and their advocates since the changes were made in 2022, and I absolutely understand their concerns. That is why we are abolishing this restriction.
This winter, every single household where the bill payer receives a means-tested benefit will be eligible for the warm home discount, which means a further 2.7 million low-income households will get that vital support. In total, more than 6 million households—one in five families in Britain—will get the help they need this winter. This expansion will help us meet our goal of tackling fuel poverty, which is critical to the work of my Department. It will increase the number of fuel-poor households that receive support, with coverage improving from 30% under the current scheme to around 45%. In total, 1.6 million fuel-poor households will receive support. I have met people on the frontline of the energy bills crisis up and down the country, so I know for a fact that there are families out there right now breathing a sigh of relief because this measure will ease the huge amount of pressure they are under with the cost of living.
One issue that is often raised with me is that families can miss out on the warm home discount because the person who receives the means-tested benefit is not named on the energy bill. To be eligible, the means-tested benefit recipient, their partner or their legal appointee needs to be named on the energy bill. I encourage all families who receive a means-tested benefit to check that and, if necessary, to contact their supplier. People need to ensure that the benefit recipient, their partner or their appointee is named on the bill before the warm home discount qualifying date, which is 24 August.
At the same time, we are going further to put the energy market back in the service of working people, taking steps to restore confidence and faith in the energy market, which has been shaken. As it stands, too many complaints against energy companies go unresolved or take too long to fix—whether it is suppliers not responding quickly enough or failing to adjust direct debits when families use less energy—which leads to a situation where consumers often do not access the compensation they are entitled to due to an overly complex complaints system.
This Government are absolutely committed to standing up for consumers who have had a bad experience of the energy system, and we are working hard to ensure that the system works in the interests of consumers. We have already made real strides in improving conditions for customers. Following the Secretary of State’s intervention and months of Government work with the sector, Ofgem announced £18.6 million of compensation for victims of forced prepayment meters in May, and we will continue to go further.
This is a Government willing to use every tool in our arsenal to fight for working people. By moving at speed to deliver clean power, and with the spending review setting out the biggest investment in the domestic clean energy industry in history, we will take back control of our energy system and do the job of protecting consumers. That is why we have wasted absolutely no time in driving forward our clean energy mission in our first year, ending the onshore wind ban, consenting more than 4 GW of renewable energy, launching Great British Energy, funding a new golden era for nuclear, kick-starting carbon capture and hydrogen industries, and investing £1 billion already to upgrade up to 300,000 homes, with £13.2 billion committed in the spending review to upgrade millions more.
This is how we will rebuild our energy network and protect families across the country: by supporting more people who need our help this winter; by restoring confidence in a reformed energy market; and by bringing bills down for good with secure, reliable, clean energy. We will ensure that every family in this country has the security of a home they can afford to heat now and in the future. I commend this statement to the House.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
As always, my hon. Friend puts it perfectly. I will pick up his point on data sharing, which is critical. My Department and the Department for Work and Pensions have been working over the past few months on the sharing of means-tested benefit data so that this will be automatic; come this winter, all eligible consumers will receive a letter informing them that they will be getting the warm home discount. It will be transferred on to energy bills as a credit—a direct payment for consumers—because we have done the groundwork to put that in place.
On my hon. Friend’s critical second point, the relative cost of gas and electricity is incredibly high, and we know that is a problem for both households and businesses, particularly as we try to make that transition to clean energy. We are continuing to do that work. I am very clear that we need to deal with that question in order, for example, for our plans to upgrade homes to have the bite and traction they need, and we are absolutely committed to doing so.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
We welcome investment in warm homes following a winter in which millions of households were living in fuel poverty. The crisis was exacerbated by the Government’s cut to winter fuel payments— and we welcome the U-turn on that, too. The former Conservative Government’s stop-starts on home insulation policies left thousands of vulnerable people in damp, cold and unsafe homes, with lower energy-efficiency standards and higher bills during an energy crisis.
Given that homes in this country are among the oldest and least energy-efficient in Europe, will the Government commit to an ambitious 10-year plan for home insulation, for which the Liberal Democrats have long called? Will they ensure that households on lower incomes will be eligible for free insulation as part of that plan? And, following the Government accepting the campaign of my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for solar panels to be mandated for all new homes, will they now look to introduce a full zero carbon standard for all new homes and solar for car parks, as put forward by the Liberal Democrats in amendments to the Planning and Infra- structure Bill?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I cannot believe it was 30 years ago that my hon. Friend was learning about green energy. We have been sprinting to deliver clean power. When we came into government we set a mission to do it by 2030. There were naysayers, and there continues to be naysayers, but we were not deterred by that. So whether it is removing the ban on onshore wind, whether it is record investment in nuclear, or whether it is a record renewables auction, we are very clear that we are putting in the investment—we are putting in the hard yards, the hard graft—to deliver clean power. Why are we doing that? Not because of ideology, but because we recognise that we inherited an energy system that was not working on behalf of consumers. We recognise that people were under huge pressure—a status quo that we were not willing to accept. We will deliver clean power, so that we can bear down on bills and ensure that we drive down energy bills for good.
That is the end of the statement, so I will allow the Front Benches a few moments to shuffle over as we continue the business for the rest of the afternoon.
(9 months ago)
Commons Chamber
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the action we are taking to protect families in the face of the global spike in gas prices. In recent months, wholesale gas prices have risen to their highest level in two years. They are up nearly 15% compared with the previous price cap period. As a result, this morning Ofgem announced the energy price cap will rise by around £9 a month between April and June. We know this will be unwelcome news for families across the country that are already worried about their bills, but as Ofgem’s chief executive officer, Jonathan Brearley, said today,
“our reliance on international gas markets leads to volatile wholesale prices, and continues to drive up bills”.
This week marks three years since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and once again the British people are paying the price of our country being exposed to fossil fuel markets controlled by petrostates and dictators. The truth is that every day we remain stuck on gas is another day families, businesses and, indeed, the public finances are at risk from these kinds of price spikes. That is why sprinting to home-grown, clean energy is the only way to end our exposure and our vulnerability as a country. In the meantime, we are determined to do all that we can to protect people, and today I want to set out the measures we are taking.
First, we want to provide greater help to the most vulnerable in time for next winter. The warm home discount currently gives around 3 million families a £150 rebate on their energy bills. The current system provides help to those on means-tested benefits, but excludes millions of people in homes not classified as hard to heat, as a result of criteria introduced by the last Government in 2022. These criteria are seen by many as arbitrary and unreliable, and they mean there are families in almost exactly the same circumstances with some receiving help and others not.
Today, we have announced that we will consult on proposals to abolish this restriction, meaning all households receiving means-tested benefits would be eligible for bills support next winter—from 3 million families in the current system to more than 6 million with our proposals—so that one in five families in Britain would get help with their bills through this scheme, including an additional 900,000 families with children and a total of 1.8 million households in fuel poverty. This Government are determined to do everything in our power to help people struggling to pay their energy bills and support the most vulnerable in our society.
Secondly, because of our exposure to fossil fuels, the cost of living crisis saw bills rocket to £2,500 and families plunged into unstable debt—debt that continues to accumulate today. In the system we have inherited, every bill payer pays for managing this debt burden. We are determined to act on behalf of those in debt and all the bill payers who are paying the costs of it. So we are working closely with Ofgem to accelerate proposals on a debt relief scheme that will support households that have built up unsustainable energy debt through the crisis and have no way of paying it. This will be an important first step to cut the costs of servicing bad energy debt, and under these plans the target would be to reduce the debt allowance paid by all bill payers to pre-crisis levels.
Thirdly, we know that one of the best answers to high bills is upgrading homes so that they are cheaper to run, so we will shortly announce the details of around £0.5 billion pounds of funding under the warm homes local grant and £1.3 billion under the warm homes social housing fund to invest in home upgrades over the coming years and cut fuel poverty. In all, up to 300,000 households will benefit from upgrades in the next financial year through our warm homes plan—whether it is new insulation, double glazing, a heat pump or rooftop solar panels—which is more than double the number supported in the last financial year. We will also ensure that landlords invest in energy efficiency upgrades that will make homes warmer and bring down costs for tenants, lifting up to 1 million people out of fuel poverty, so that we are doing everything we can to ensure people have the security of a home they can afford to heat.
Fourthly, we are clear that we need a regulator that fights for consumers. That is why we have called on Ofgem to use its powers to the maximum to protect consumers by challenging unlawful back billing, taking action on inaccurate bills, driving the smart meter roll-out, giving every family the option of a zero standing charge tariff so they have more choice in how they pay for their energy, and ensuring that compensation is given for wrongful installation of prepayment meters. We are moving forward on our review of Ofgem to ensure it has the powers it needs to stand up for consumers and clamp down on poor behaviour by energy companies.
This set of measures shows a Government willing to use all the powers at our disposal to help protect consumers. However, important as these measures are, I must stress to the House that there is no proper solution to rising energy bills while this country remains exposed to the rollercoaster of fossil fuel markets. That is why this Government are moving at speed to deliver clean power by lifting the onshore wind ban in England, consenting nearly 3 GW of solar, setting up Great British Energy, delivering a record-breaking renewables auction, making it easier to build the next generation of new nuclear power stations, and getting on with the job of implementing the reforms to the planning system, the grid and renewables auctions set out in our clean power action plan.
I have to report to the House, however, that despite the importance of this mission and the fact that we are running it, we continue to receive representations from Opposition parties not to speed up, but to slow down and to reject solar power, reject onshore wind, reject offshore wind and reject new transmission infrastructure—representations that, if accepted, would leave us more vulnerable and more insecure, with the British people paying the price. Let me tell the House that we will reject those representations. We know that every solar panel we put up, every wind turbine we build and every piece of transmission infrastructure we construct makes us more secure, and every time the Conservatives oppose those measures, they double down on their legacy of leaving this country exposed and the British people deeply vulnerable.
This Government will do whatever it takes to stand up for working people now and in the future—protecting families and businesses from the consequences of global events, driving forward our plans to bring down bills for good and doing everything in our power to support those most in need. I commend this statement to the House.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have an energy market that does not work sufficiently in the interest of consumers, and we are committed to turning that around. That is why we are reforming the electricity market, why we are trying to drive forward a shift from fossil fuels to clean power, and why we are putting in place the review of Ofgem, to ensure that customers and consumers are at the very heart of everything we do in the energy market. This is an important step to supporting households in the short term. We took action this winter, with up to £1 billion of support through Government and industry to help the most vulnerable customers, and the measures announced today will ensure that we will provide support next winter. However, it is not the end of our ambition; it is the start of our ambition to reform the energy market.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
When will you set those out, Minister, since I will not be responding at the Dispatch Box?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
The hon. Lady is right that insulating and upgrading people’s homes is the route by which we will reduce bills and deliver homes that are warmer and cheaper to run. That is why we are absolutely committed to the warm homes plan. Rather than there being a pause, we are running at this.
Next financial year, 300,000 homes will be upgraded, which is double the number in the previous financial year, and that is just the start for our warm homes plan. We are working with colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to bring forward the future homes and buildings standards. Critically, we have spoken to industry, installers and local government, and we are acutely aware that there should and cannot be a hiatus. We are moving forward with the local grant and the warm homes social housing scheme to ensure that there is not one. I ask the hon. Lady to write with the specifics of that scheme, because we are trying to design it to stop that.
Critically, on the social tariff, we are clear that clean power is the route by which we will bear down on energy costs in the long term, but that we will need to support the most vulnerable customers as we get there. There are different ways to design a social tariff, and we are looking at options for how to support the most vulnerable at the moment, and the warm home discount is a key part of delivering that.
I call Luke Murphy, a member of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I thank my hon. Friend—that was well said.
The Conservative party left us with the highest energy prices that we have seen in a generation. That is a legacy that, quite frankly, should see them hang their heads in shame. Rather than criticising us for trying to unpick and deal with their legacies, I would strongly caution them to support our action. [Interruption.] It is their legacy!
My hon. Friend is right: the way that we get out of this bind, left by and inherited from the Conservative party, is through clean power, delivering renewables that we know are cheaper and clean power by 2030. My hon. Friend is right; the Conservative party continues to be misguided. Thankfully, we are in the driving seat.
I call a member of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, Bradley Thomas.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
Rising energy costs affect not just households but industry. Sir Jim Ratcliffe has said that deindustrialising Britain is a false economy because it “shifts production and emissions elsewhere”. Can the Minister tell the House what is more important: chasing an arbitrary target or protecting industry and jobs?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
My hon. Friend is completely right: the previous Government failed to insulate and upgrade enough homes to protect people from energy price hikes. Conservative Members are hanging their heads in shame and rightly so. She is also right that we are committed to upgrading hundreds of thousands of homes. That is critical. The way that we ensure that households are insulated from price rises and the way that we drive down prices is to upgrade those homes. That is a central part of our plan. We are already running at it with 300,000 homes in the coming year, but we will build on that, because we want to ensure that homes across the country benefit.
I call a member of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
Chopping and changing home upgrade schemes, as we saw under the previous Conservative Government, causes uncertainty and confusion, which is damaging for both consumers and installers alike. Will this Government avoid that mistake by setting out long-term plans for energy efficiency schemes that go beyond 2026?
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
Extending the warm home discount to all households that receive means-tested benefits could make a difference to many, especially those who have not received their winter fuel payment this winter. However, £150 off will not go far enough to help the 56% of adults in Wales likely to ration their energy over the next three months, according to National Energy Action Cymru. With the energy price cap rising again in April, will the Minister admit that we need long-term solutions that ensure energy affordability, such as the social energy tariff, which I have asked for since I came to this House last July, in order to support—
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I agree that we need long-term solutions. That is why we have talked constantly about the clean power mission, and why we are clear that while we make the transition to clean power, we will support the most vulnerable households. As an important first step, we are extending support next winter to over 6 million people who we know are struggling. We will continue to build on that in the weeks and months ahead.