THE NEW TOWNS

‘When the town has reached maturity, it will have to be decided
whether the agency should be dissolved and the assets and liabilities
taken over at a valuation by the local authority or some national body,
or whether the agency should continue in being, modified in constitution.
 as land owner and estate manager.’
The Committee inclined to the latter view, though some of its members
favoured a transfer to the local authority. The majority foresaw a division
of labour in which local authorities should take over their normal functions—roads,
 housing, planning, education, sewerage, etc.—while the
Corporation, as land owner, would settle rents, lettings, maintenance and
re-development for all its land and buildings, handing over any. surplus to
the local authority for general use. In order to maintain a proper liaison
between these two different bodies, the Committee thought it would be
appropriate ‘ when the major work of construction is competed’ to include
in the Corporation ‘a minority of members—possibly two—resident in the
New Town and elected by the residents by direct vote.’

Local Representation
Here is the origin of the suggestion, strongly urged by local Labour
parties in New Towns, that the Corporations should already be broadened
to include more local representation. The problein, so long as the Corporations
 remain responsible to the Minister, is one of maintaining responsibility;
elected Corporation members (either by direct vote or from among present
members of the local authority) would have a dual loyalty. The answer lies,
really, with the Minister, who can choose more local representatives, who
broadly reflect the political outlook of the town, from among those proposed
by the local authority, yet insist that their responsibility to him remains
unimpaired.
When the New Towns Act was drafted, the emphasis differed from that
of the Reith Committee. Section 15 (1) of the Act provided: —
“Where the Minister is satisfied that the purposes for which a
Development Corporation was established under this Act have been
substantially achieved, and js further satisfied, with the concurrence of
the Treasury, that the circumstances are not such as to render it expedient
on financial grounds to defer the disposal of the undertaking of the
Corporation under this section, he shall by order provide for the winding
up and dissolution of the Corporation.’

Ownership was then to pass to the local authority (its status is not
specified in the Act) on terms to be determined by an order made by the
Minister with the consent of the Treasury.
These terms are only broadly defined. But they may contain any special
provisions that the Minister ‘thinks necessary or expedient’ and they may
similarly ‘ extend or modify the powers and duties of that authority.’ In
short, without further legislation, the Minister can do more or less he and
the Government of the day choose to do.
Clearly, the transfer of an undertaking which has a capital investment
of £20 to £40 millions, will be an important landmark in the development