DOCSLIB.ORG

Parliamentary Debates House of Commons Official Report General Committees

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Parliamentary Debates House of Commons Official Report General Committees PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT GENERAL COMMITTEES Public Bill Committee LOCALISM BILL Seventh Sitting Thursday 3 February 2011 (Morning) CONTENTS Written evidence reported to the House. CLAUSES 13 and 14 agreed to. SCHEDULE 4 agreed to. CLAUSES 15 and 16 agreed to. CLAUSE 17 under consideration when the Committee adjourned till this day at One o’clock. PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON – THE STATIONERY OFFICE LIMITED £4·00 PBC (Bill 126) 2010 - 2011 Members who wish to have copies of the Official Report of Proceedings in General Committees sent to them are requested to give notice to that effect at the Vote Office. No proofs can be supplied. Corrigenda slips may be published with Bound Volume editions. Corrigenda that Members suggest should be clearly marked in a copy of the report—not telephoned—and must be received in the Editor’s Room, House of Commons, not later than Monday 7 February 2011 STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT WILL GREATLY FACILITATE THE PROMPT PUBLICATION OF THE BOUND VOLUMES OF PROCEEDINGS IN GENERAL COMMITTEES © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2011 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 279 Public Bill Committee3 FEBRUARY 2011 Localism Bill 280 The Committee consisted of the following Members: Chairs: MR DAVID AMESS,†HUGH BAYLEY † Alexander, Heidi (Lewisham East) (Lab) † Ollerenshaw, Eric (Lancaster and Fleetwood) (Con) Barwell, Gavin (Croydon Central) (Con) † Raynsford, Mr Nick (Greenwich and Woolwich) † Bruce, Fiona (Congleton) (Con) (Lab) † Cairns, Alun (Vale of Glamorgan) (Con) † Reynolds, Jonathan (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/ † Clark, Greg (Minister of State, Department for Co-op) Communities and Local Government) † Seabeck, Alison (Plymouth, Moor View) (Lab) † Dakin, Nic (Scunthorpe) (Lab) Simpson, David (Upper Bann) (DUP) † Dromey, Jack (Birmingham, Erdington) (Lab) † Smith, Henry (Crawley) (Con) † Elliott, Julie (Sunderland Central) (Lab) † Stewart, Iain (Milton Keynes South) (Con) † Gilbert, Stephen (St Austell and Newquay) (LD) † Stunell, Andrew (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of † Howell, John (Henley) (Con) State for Communities and Local Government) † Keeley, Barbara (Worsley and Eccles South) (Lab) † Ward, Mr David (Bradford East) (LD) † Lewis, Brandon (Great Yarmouth) (Con) † Wiggin, Bill (North Herefordshire) (Con) McDonagh, Siobhain (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab) † Mearns, Ian (Gateshead) (Lab) Sarah Davies, Committee Clerk † Morris, James (Halesowen and Rowley Regis) (Con) † Neill, Robert (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government) † attended the Committee 281 Public Bill CommitteeHOUSE OF COMMONS Localism Bill 282 When we adjourned on Tuesday, the Committee Public Bill Committee had agreed that clause 12 should stand part of the Bill. We now move on to clause 13, which is about predetermination—the difficulty that arises when people Thursday 3 February 2011 come to a meeting having already decided what they believe, irrespective of the evidence. That is not a problem (Morning) that we have here at all. Clause 13 [HUGH BAYLEY in the Chair] PRIOR INDICATIONS OF VIEW OF A MATTER NOT TO Localism Bill AMOUNT TO PREDETERMINATION ETC Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Written evidence to be reported to the Bill. House L 48 Philip Coleman Barbara Keeley (Worsley and Eccles South) (Lab): It is a pleasure to be back in Committee Room 12 for a L 49 David Alexander second day, for the seventh sitting of this Committee. L 50 Institute of Historic Building Conservation The Law Society has expressed concern about whether L 51 Highgate Society “closed mind” is the right term to use in subsection (1)(b). L 52 Development Trusts Association The Law Society feels that the benefit of the clause could be eroded if an individual expresses a view on L 53 County Councils Network development and is later perceived to have had a closed L 54 E.ON mind. That would make an individual susceptible to L 55 Professor Tony Warnes and Dr Maureen Crane challenge, and I do not think any of us want councillors L 56 Keep Britain Tidy to be challenged on such issues. Will the Minister consider tabling an amendment to correct that wording, if it is L 57 Federation of Master Builders problematic? L 58 British Retail Consortium L 59 Rick Long MRTPI Robert Neill: I have listened to the hon. Lady, and I L 60 Richard Carter will take the point on board, but we do not believe that L 61 Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council the wording is problematic. Lawyers are like economists: if there are enough of them in a room, there will be a L62Moat number of varying opinions. However, I do of course L 63 Highbury Group on Housing Delivery take the view of the Law Society seriously, and we will consider it. I get the sense from the hon. Lady’s observation 9.30 am that the objective of the clause is accepted by Members on both sides of the room, and given that, I hope that The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the clause may stand part as it is. If there is a difficulty, Communities and Local Government (Robert Neill): On I will happily speak to the Law Society and other a point of order, Mr Bayley. Good morning, and welcome interested parties and keep the hon. Lady informed. back to the Chair. On Tuesday, the right hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich raised the pertinent issue of charging being restricted to the territorial sea of the Barbara Keeley: Could the Minister report back at a United Kingdom or otherwise. I have written to him later stage, if that discussion produces anything worth today, and I have ensured that copies of the letter are while that I could then consider? available on the table. My letter confirms the prescience of the observation of the hon. Member for Plymouth, Robert Neill: Yes, I will happily do that. Moor View; the measure is designed to reflect provisions in the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, so that the Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con): My point relates to regimes are the same. It will cover not only the channel the definition of “relevant authority”. My constituency tunnel, but oil rigs and structures such as lighthouses has a unitary council, and subsection (4) mentions a that might be just beyond the territorial limit but could “county borough council”. Is that a unitary council for be reached by coastguard or other boats, if they required the purposes of the definition? Why were such councils the assistance of the fire services. not referred to in clause 7, where the definition of “local authority” excludes county borough councils and makes The Chair: I thank the Minister for that, although it no reference to unitary councils? is not strictly a point of order. Robert Neill: The provision mirrors the standard terminology. Although we have defined unitary councils, Mr Nick Raynsford (Greenwich and Woolwich) (Lab): if we look at other enactments, we see that unitary Further to that point of order, Mr Bayley. I thank the councils are frequently referred to in legislation as district Minister for his most helpful contribution. or other councils. That does not create any problems, as I understand it. I assure my hon. Friend that the clause The Chair: Good. I am grateful to the Minister for covers all authorities, including unitary authorities, which coming back to the Committee, as he promised he would. have the functions of borough or county councils. She 283 Public Bill Committee3 FEBRUARY 2011 Localism Bill 284 can rest assured that the rule will apply to unitary accountability function of Parliament, and I would like councils as much as to any other councils, not least the Minister to tell me why the impact assessments were because my interest in the subject was prompted by the so late. difficulties my wife had when she was a member of a The impact assessment for this part of the Bill tells us unitary authority and found that she was constrained that the misconduct of failing to treat others with when raising issues on behalf of her constituents. respect amounts to 30% of breaches of the code, while acting in a manner that could reasonably be regarded as bringing the authority into disrepute amounted to 20%. Ian Mearns (Gateshead) (Lab): Deep in the recesses The impact assessment says: of my mind, I seem to remember that county boroughs “Risks may arise from breaches related to bullying others or were established under the Municipal Corporations disclosing confidential information, but it would be possible for Act 1882. Many of those county boroughs have been authorities to put procedures into place to minimise these risks.” subsumed into unitary or metropolitan authorities, but As I see it, if codes of conduct were voluntary, the staff there are still some dotted around the country. of councils and members of the public would have no effective redress against such misconduct. Robert Neill: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. In evidence to the Committee, John Findlay of the This is one of those interchangeable bits of terminology, National Association of Local Councils made the case but the purpose of the clause is to capture all directly that there is a demand for a code of conduct: elected authorities. It also, for the sake of fullness, “Most of our councils welcomed the idea that they were includes co-opted—as well as elected—members of national subject to a code, but it was more on the basis that at least it was park authorities and other relevant bodies, such as the same that the principal authorities—the counties, districts and boroughs—were treated to”.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Of Those Who Pledged, 43 Were Elected As
    First name Last name Full name Constituency Party Rosena Allin-Khan Rosena Allin-Khan Tooting Labour Fleur Anderson Fleur Anderson Putney Labour Tonia Antoniazzi Tonia Antoniazzi Gower Labour Ben Bradshaw Ben Bradshaw Exeter Labour Graham Brady Graham Brady Altrincham and Sale West Conservative Nicholas Brown Nicholas Brown Newcastle upon Tyne East Labour Wendy Chamberlain Wendy Chamberlain North East Fife Lib Dem Angela Crawley Angela Crawley Lanark and Hamilton East SNP Edward Davey Edward Davey Kingston and Surbiton Lib Dem Florence Eshalomi Florence Eshalomi Vauxhall Labour Tim Farron Tim Farron Westmorland and Lonsdale Lib Dem Simon Fell Simon Fell Barrow and Furness Conservative Yvonne Fovargue Yvonne Fovargue Makerfield Labour Mary Foy Mary Foy City Of Durham Labour Kate Green Kate Green Stretford and Urmston Labour Fabian Hamilton Fabian Hamilton Leeds North East Labour Helen Hayes Helen Hayes Dulwich and West Norwood Labour Dan Jarvis Dan Jarvis Barnsley Central Labour Clive Lewis Clive Lewis Norwich South Labour Caroline Lucas Caroline Lucas Brighton, Pavilion Green Justin Madders Justin Madders Ellesmere Port and Neston Labour Kerry McCarthy Kerry McCarthy Bristol East Labour Layla Moran Layla Moran Oxford West and Abingdon Lib Dem Penny Mordaunt Penny Mordaunt Portsmouth North Conservative Jessica Morden Jessica Morden Newport East Labour Stephen Morgan Stephen Morgan Portsmouth South Labour Ian Murray Ian Murray Edinburgh South Labour Yasmin Qureshi Yasmin Qureshi Bolton South East Labour Jonathan Reynolds Jonathan Reynolds
    [Show full text]
  • NEW SHADOW CABINET 2020 Who’S In, Who’S Out?
    NEW SHADOW CABINET 2020 Who’s In, Who’s Out? BRIEFING PAPER blackcountrychamber.co.uk Who’s in and Who’s out? Sir Keir Starmer, newly elected Leader of the UK Labour Party, set about building his first Shadow Cabinet, following his election win in the Labour Party leadership contest. In our parliamentary system, a cabinet reshuffle or shuffle is an informal term for an event that occurs when the head of a government or party rotates or changes the composition of ministers in their cabinet. The Shadow Cabinet is a function of the Westminster system consisting of a senior group of opposition spokespeople. It is the Shadow Cabinet’s responsibility to scrutinise the policies and actions of the government, as well as to offer alternative policies. Position Former Post Holder Result of New Post Holder Reshuffle Leader of the Opposition The Rt Hon Jeremy Resigned The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer and Leader of the Labour Corbyn MP KCB QC MP Party Deputy Leader and Chair of Tom Watson Resigned Angela Raynor MP the Labour Party Shadow Chancellor of the The Rt Hon John Resigned Anneliese Dodds MP Exchequer McDonnell MP Shadow Foreign Secretary The Rt Hon Emily Moved to Lisa Nandy MP Thornberry MP International Trade Shadow Home Secretary The Rt Hon Diane Resigned Nick Thomas-Symonds MP Abbott MP Shadow Chancellor of the Rachel Reeves MP Duchy of Lancaster Shadow Justice Secretary Richard Burgon MP Left position The Rt Hon David Lammy MP Shadow Defence Secretary Nia Griffith MP Moved to Wales The Rt Hon John Healey MP Office Shadow Business, Energy Rebecca
    [Show full text]
  • Environment Bill (Report Stage Decisions)
    Report Stage: Wednesday 26 May 2021 Environment Bill (Report Stage Decisions) This document sets out the fate of each clause, schedule, amendment and new clause considered at report stage. A glossary with key terms can be found at the end of this document. NEW CLAUSES AND NEW SCHEDULES RELATING TO PART 6; AMENDMENTS TO PART 6; NEW CLAUSES AND NEW SCHEDULES RELATING TO PART 7; AMENDMENTS TO PART 7; NEW CLAUSES AND NEW SCHEDULES RELATING TO CLAUSES 132 TO 139; AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSES 132 TO 139 NEW CLAUSES AND NEW SCHEDULES RELATING TO PART 6 Secretary George Eustice Agreed to NC21 To move the following Clause— “Habitats Regulations: power to amend general duties (1) The Secretary of State may by regulations amend the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (S.I. 2017/1012) (the “Habitats Regulations”), as they apply in relation to England, for the purposes in subsection (2). 5 (2) The purposes are—— (a) to require persons within regulation 9(1) of the Habitats Regulations to exercise functions to which that regulation applies— (i) to comply with requirements imposed by regulations 10 under this section, or (ii) to further objectives specified in regulations under this section, instead of exercising them to secure compliance with the requirements of the Directives; 15 (b) to require persons within regulation 9(3) of the Habitats Regulations, when exercising functions to which that regulation applies, to have regard to matters specified by regulations under this section instead of the requirements of the Directives. (3) The regulations may impose requirements, or specify objectives or 20 matters, relating to— (a) targets in respect of biodiversity set by regulations under section 1; 2 Wednesday 26 May 2021 REPORT STAGE (b) improvements to the natural environment which relate to biodiversity and are set out in an environmental improvement 25 plan.
    [Show full text]
  • MEETING of the BOARD of TRUSTEES Items in Red Are Confidential
    Trust Board Meeting, 18 March 2021 for publication MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Items in red are confidential Minutes of a meeting of the Board of Trustees (“the Trustees”) of the Canal & River Trust (“the Trust”) held on Thursday 18 March 2021 at 8:30am – 1pm via Zoom Present: Allan Leighton, Chair Dame Jenny Abramsky, Deputy Chair Nigel Annett CBE Ben Gordon Janet Hogben Sir Chris Kelly Jennie Price CBE Tim Reeve (until 12pm) Sarah Whitney Sue Wilkinson In attendance: Richard Parry, Chief Executive Julie Sharman, Chief Operating Officer Stuart Mills, Chief Investment Officer Simon Bamford, Asset Improvement Director Heather Clarke, Strategy, Engagement, and Impact Director Steve Dainty, Finance Director Tom Deards, Head of Legal & Governance Services and Company Secretary Gemma Towns, Corporate Governance Manager (minute-taker) 21/016 WELCOME & APOLOGIES The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting. The Chair confirmed that notice of the meeting had been given to all Trustees and that a quorum was present. 21/017 DECLARATION OF INTERESTS (TRUST 534) The Board noted the Register of Interests report (Trust 534). The Trustees present confirmed they did not have any interests in the matters on the agenda. 21/018 MINUTES AND SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS The minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting held on 27 January 2021 were approved as a true and accurate record. The matters arising report was noted by the Board. All actions were in Trust Board Meeting, 18 March 2021 for publication-18/03/21 1 of 59 Trust Board Meeting, 18 March 2021 for publication progress or appeared on the agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • Stephen Kinnock MP Aberav
    Member Name Constituency Bespoke Postage Total Spend £ Spend £ £ (Incl. VAT) (Incl. VAT) Stephen Kinnock MP Aberavon 318.43 1,220.00 1,538.43 Kirsty Blackman MP Aberdeen North 328.11 6,405.00 6,733.11 Neil Gray MP Airdrie and Shotts 436.97 1,670.00 2,106.97 Leo Docherty MP Aldershot 348.25 3,214.50 3,562.75 Wendy Morton MP Aldridge-Brownhills 220.33 1,535.00 1,755.33 Sir Graham Brady MP Altrincham and Sale West 173.37 225.00 398.37 Mark Tami MP Alyn and Deeside 176.28 700.00 876.28 Nigel Mills MP Amber Valley 489.19 3,050.00 3,539.19 Hywel Williams MP Arfon 18.84 0.00 18.84 Brendan O'Hara MP Argyll and Bute 834.12 5,930.00 6,764.12 Damian Green MP Ashford 32.18 525.00 557.18 Angela Rayner MP Ashton-under-Lyne 82.38 152.50 234.88 Victoria Prentis MP Banbury 67.17 805.00 872.17 David Duguid MP Banff and Buchan 279.65 915.00 1,194.65 Dame Margaret Hodge MP Barking 251.79 1,677.50 1,929.29 Dan Jarvis MP Barnsley Central 542.31 7,102.50 7,644.81 Stephanie Peacock MP Barnsley East 132.14 1,900.00 2,032.14 John Baron MP Basildon and Billericay 130.03 0.00 130.03 Maria Miller MP Basingstoke 209.83 1,187.50 1,397.33 Wera Hobhouse MP Bath 113.57 976.00 1,089.57 Tracy Brabin MP Batley and Spen 262.72 3,050.00 3,312.72 Marsha De Cordova MP Battersea 763.95 7,850.00 8,613.95 Bob Stewart MP Beckenham 157.19 562.50 719.69 Mohammad Yasin MP Bedford 43.34 0.00 43.34 Gavin Robinson MP Belfast East 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paul Maskey MP Belfast West 0.00 0.00 0.00 Neil Coyle MP Bermondsey and Old Southwark 1,114.18 7,622.50 8,736.68 John Lamont MP Berwickshire Roxburgh
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas Oakervee Independent Chair, Oakervee Review Department for Transport Albany House 94-98 Petty France London SW1H 9EA
    Douglas Oakervee Independent Chair, Oakervee Review Department for Transport Albany House 94-98 Petty France London SW1H 9EA Dear Douglas Oakervee Review Submission from Greater Manchester Parliamentarians As members of the Greater Manchester All Party Parliamentary Group (GM APPG) we wanted to welcome your review on the future of HS2 and to ensure that the collective views of Greater Manchester Parliamentarians are considered and taken on board. Greater Manchester MPs of all parties work collaboratively to provide a strong voice for the city- region in Westminster, working alongside the Mayor and local business and political leaders to help maximise future investment and growth for the benefit of the communities throughout Greater Manchester. We want to emphasise the following key points: After decades of underinvestment in strategic rail infrastructure and transport in the North, HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail, if combined with a clear commitment to much needed investment in our intra city transport networks, will provide the basis for a once-in-a-generation programme to secure the levels of investment and productivity in our northern cities that is essential to transform the North’s economic output and the life chances of residents here. Given the scale of the challenge to rebalance and level-up the UK, the GMAPPG strongly believes that choices cannot be made between HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail. Only by delivering the two initiatives together, as a future strategic rail network can we achieve the transformational economic outcomes that we share with Government. In making our case we would urge your team to consider the following points: • The full and timely delivery of Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) and HS2 Phase 2b is central to Greater Manchester’s wider ambitions for the role of rail in city-region growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Keir Starmer's Shadow Cabinet
    Keir Starmer’s Shadow Cabinet Member of Parliament Shadow Cabinet Position Kier Starmer Leader of the Opposition Angela Rayner Deputy Leader and Chair of the Labour Party Anneliese Dodds Chancellor of the Exchequer Lisa Nandy Foreign Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds Home Secretary Rachel Reeves Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster David Lammy Justice Secretary John Healey Defence Secretary Ed Miliband Business, Energy and Industrial Secretary Emily Thornberry International Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds Work and Pensions Secretary Jonathan Ashworth Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Rebecca Long-Bailey Education Secretary Jo Stevens Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Bridget Philipson Chief Secretary to the Treasury Luke Pollard Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed Communities and Local Government Secretary Thangam Debbonaire Housing Secretary Jim McMahon Transport Secretary Preet Kaur Gill International Development Secretary Louise Haigh Northern Ireland Secretary (interim) Ian Murray Scotland Secretary Nia Griffith Wales Secretary Marsha de Cordova Women and Equalities Secretary Andy McDonald Employment Rights and Protections Secretary Rosena Allin-Khan Minister for Mental Health Cat Smith Minister for Young People and Voter Engagement Lord Falconer Attorney General Valerie Vaz Leader of the House Nick Brown Opposition Chief Whip Baroness Smith Shadow Leader of the Lords Lord McAvoy Lords’ Opposition Chief Whip Prepared by DevoConnect, April 2020. For more information contact [email protected] Keir
    [Show full text]
  • NEC Annual Report 2019
    Labour Party | Annual Report 2019 LABOUR PARTY ANNUAL REPORT 2019 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Treasurers’ Responsibilities . 54 Foreword from Jeremy Corbyn . 5 Independent Auditor’s Report Introduction from Tom Watson . 7 to the members of the Labour Party . 55 Introduction from the General Secretary . 9 Consolidated income and expenditure account 2018/2019 National Executive Committee . 10 for the year ended 31 December 2018 . 57 NEC Committees . 12 Statements of comprehensive income Obituaries . 13 and changes in equity for the year ended NEC aims and objectives for 2019 . 14 31 December 2018 . 58 Consolidated balance sheet BY-ELECTIONS . 15 at 31 December 2018 . 59 Peterborough . 16 Consolidated cash flow statement for the year Newport West . 17 ended 31 December 2018 . 60 ELECTIONS 2019 . 19 Notes to Financial Statements . 61 Analysis . 20 APPENDICES . 75 Local Government Report . 23 Members of Shadow Cabinet LOOKING AHEAD: 2020 ELECTIONS . 25 and Opposition Frontbench . 76 The year ahead in Scotland . 26 Parliamentary Labour Party . 80 The year ahead in Wales . 27 Members of the Scottish Parliament. 87 NEC PRIORITIES FOR 2019 . 29 Members of the Welsh Assembly . 88 Members and Supporters Members of the European Parliament . 89 Renewing our party and building an active Directly Elected Mayors . 90 membership and supporters network . 30 Members of the London Assembly . 91 Equalities . 31 Leaders of Labour Groups . 92 Labour Peers . 100 NEC PRIORITIES FOR 2019 . 35 Labour Police and Crime Commissioners . 103 National Policy Forum Parliamentary Candidates endorsed NPF Report . 36 by the NEC at time of publication . 104 NEC PRIORITIES FOR 2019 . 39 NEC Disputes . 107 International NCC Cases .
    [Show full text]
  • APPG Question Time on Healthy Lives and Quality Care Friday 19Th January 2018, Manchester Metropolitan University
    APPG Question Time on Healthy Lives and Quality Care Friday 19th January 2018, Manchester Metropolitan University NON-VERBATIM MINUTES ATTENDED BY: Officers: Lucy Powell MP and Jonathan Reynolds MP Members: Rt Hon. the Lord Pendry and Rt Hon. the Lord Stunell Speakers: Andy Burnham (Mayor of Greater Manchester), Jon Rouse (Chief Officer, GM Health and Social Care Partnership), Lord Peter Smith (Chair, GM Strategic Partnership Board), Alison Chambers (Pro-Vice-Dean for Health, MMU), Alex Whinnom (Chief Executive, GMCVO) In Attendance for the Secretariat: Gill Morris, Sam Popper, Steve Barwick and Ross Cathcart Apologies: Debbie Abrahams MP, Yasmin Qureshi MP, Mary Robinson MP, Kate Green MP, Afzal Khan MP, Angela Rayner MP, Jeff Smith MP, Yvonne Fovargue MP, Chris Green MP, Kate Green MP, Andrew Gwynne MP, Mike Kane MP, Lord O’Neill, Cllr Jean Stretton, Cllr Sir Richard Leese, Cllr Alex Ganotis, Joanne Roney, Theresa Grant. A full list of attendees including stakeholders is appended to the minutes 1. Welcome and introductions Lucy Powell, Chair of the Greater Manchester APPG and MP for Manchester Central, welcomed everybody to the meeting. Malcolm Press, Vice-Chancellor of MMU, welcomed the guests. The health and social care (H&SC) agenda is central to MMU’s work. Lord Peter Smith, Chair of the GM Strategic Partnership Board, said that H&SC devolution is not just about health but about wider society. The first year focused on getting the appropriate systems into place and developing strategy. Greater Manchester (GM) is moving towards focusing on good health rather than just ill health. Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, said there is now more awareness of devolution in GM an devolution could be a beacon of hope.
    [Show full text]
  • Response to LCG Questions from Jonathan Reynolds. We Also Comment on His Responses. the Following Is the Extract from Mr
    Response to LCG questions from Jonathan Reynolds. We also comment on his responses. The following is the extract from Mr. Reynolds’ response which is relevant to our questions. We’ve organised these by A, B, C etc. Mr. Reynolds’ comments are in blue italics. LCG = Longdendale Community Group. A. Reynolds: We need more housing but I only support developments that contain a mixture of housing sizes, good design, and affordable homes. None of this information is available with regard to these sites, as this stage of the process only deals with land allocation. LCG response: The GMSF plans do give some indication. For instance, regarding Mottram the sites should deliver “where possible higher value development.” B. Reynolds: .....young people and families paying extortionate mortgages, or not being able to afford a home at all. A huge number of working people in their 20s still live with their parents.....It's not right and we must do better. Failure to build any new homes at all would mean that within our lifetime home ownership would become a distance dream reserved for the rich, and homelessness would rocket. We have to plan new homes but we have to get it right. LCG: an amplification of the question 4b? No comment re question 4b, on how “proposed housing on these 3 sites will help 20-25 year olds get onto the housing market?” C. Reynolds: Housing in Greater Manchester (GM) over the next 20 years is currently being considered in the ‘Greater Manchester Spatial Framework’. I think this is the right approach because planning housing on a GM basis means urban areas like Salford and Manchester can take a greater share than us.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Cabinet, Item 10
    ITEM NO: 10 Report To: EXECUTIVE CABINET Date: 24 October 2012 Executive Member/Reporting Cllr K Quinn - Executive Leader Officer: Robin Monk - Executive Director (Economic Growth, Investment & Sustainability) Damien Bourke - Head of Strategic Investment & Development Subject: REVITALISING TAMESIDE’S TOWNS Report Summary: This report sets out the Council’s future plans to revitalise Tameside’s town centres. Recommendations: Subject to formal Key Decision at Cabinet Executive Members are asked to: 1. Note the content of the report and approve the proposals it puts forward; 2. Approve the submission of a capital bid of £4.5m to fund the public realm works to Ashton Market Square; 3. Approve delegation to the Executive Director (Economic Growth, Investment & Sustainability) to: a) Agree an action plan for each of Tameside’s six Town Teams on behalf of Tameside Council; and b) Allocate and approve the spending of High Street Innovation Fund monies on behalf of each Town Team in accordance with the relevant Action Plan, to a maximum value of £16,666 per Town Team. Links to Community Strategy: Town Centres play a key role in meeting the aims of Prosperous Tameside and Attractive Tameside, with direct and indirect links to all other Community Strategy themes. Policy Implications: A strategic and co-ordinated approach to town centres is essential to deliver successful outcomes that make best use of available resources. Financial Implications: The report advises that further investment to revitalise town centres is essential if local businesses and communities are to (Authorised by the Borough flourish. Any costs relating to action plans must be met from Treasurer) existing budgets.
    [Show full text]
  • Register of Interests of Members' Secretaries and Research Assistants
    REGISTER OF INTERESTS OF MEMBERS’ SECRETARIES AND RESEARCH ASSISTANTS (As at 27 December 2018) INTRODUCTION Purpose and Form of the Register In accordance with Resolutions made by the House of Commons on 17 December 1985 and 28 June 1993, holders of photo-identity passes as Members’ secretaries or research assistants are in essence required to register: ‘Any occupation or employment for which you receive over £385 from the same source in the course of a calendar year, if that occupation or employment is in any way advantaged by the privileged access to Parliament afforded by your pass. Any gift (eg jewellery) or benefit (eg hospitality, services) that you receive, if the gift or benefit in any way relates to or arises from your work in Parliament and its value exceeds £385 in the course of a calendar year.’ In Section 1 of the Register entries are listed alphabetically according to the staff member’s surname. Section 2 contains exactly the same information but entries are instead listed according to the sponsoring Member’s name. Administration and Inspection of the Register The Register is compiled and maintained by the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. Anyone whose details are entered on the Register is required to notify that office of any change in their registrable interests within 28 days of such a change arising. An updated edition of the Register is published approximately every 6 weeks when the House is sitting. Changes to the rules governing the Register are determined by the Committee on Standards in the House of Commons, although where such changes are substantial they are put by the Committee to the House for approval before being implemented.
    [Show full text]