Commentary on Sections Introduction Change from two tiers to single tier of local government Section 3: Invitations, directions and proposals: supplementary
20.Subsection (1) of section 3 provides that the Secretary of State may only direct an authority to make a proposal for a single tier of local government where he believes that it would be in the interests of effective and convenient local government. However, the Secretary of State may not give a direction after 25 January 2008.
21.This subsection has the effect of limiting the Secretary of State’s power of direction to one year from the 25 January 2007 – the date by which proposals in response to the invitation issued in October 2006 had to be received. This will allow only a short window of opportunity in which the Secretary of State may issue a direction.
22.Subsection (4) sets out that a proposal recommending a single tier of local government for an area can only be made where either the whole or part of that area is currently two-tier (as defined by section 23(2)) .
23.Subsection (5) requires an authority to have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State when submitting a proposal.
24.Subsection (6) specifies that where an invitation or direction is given to more than one authority, an authority can make a proposal either on its own or jointly with another authority.
25.Subsection (7) enables an invitation or direction to be varied or revoked by the Secretary of State.
26.Subsection (8) provides that a direction given under section 2, i.e. before the 25 January 2008 deadline may not later be varied if the original direction required a Type A proposal (whole county proposal based on existing county boundaries) or Type B proposal (one or more districts in a county area based on existing district boundaries); and, the variation would require or permit a Type C proposal (combination of whole county or one or more districts in that county with an adjoining county or counties, or district(s)) or a combined proposal.
27.This is to ensure that a variation does not “affect” more or different authorities which were not “affected” by the original direction, so that for example, the Secretary of State should not be able to vary a direction from being one to an authority to produce a Type B proposal to one to the same authority to produce a Type C proposal as that would inevitably affect at least one different and new authority which would not have been affected by the terms of the original direction.