Local authorities have been united in opposition to a Bill that they have branded a ‘threat to local democracy’.

The Local Government (Amendment) Bill contains a provision that would allow the Department of Infrastructure to require a local authority or joint board to perform a specified ratepayer-funded function.

Critics say the clause, which was not in the original Bill but was added in a House of Keys amendment by Ramsey MHK Lawrie Hooper, would create an ‘onerous financial burden’.

But the Infrastructure Minister said it would prevent local authorities from ‘walking away’ from services.

The Bill came before the Legislative Council this week when evidence was received from more than a dozen Commissioners boards and Douglas City Council.

A number of local authorities provided opening remarks at the hearing calling for clause 5 to be removed in its entirety.

Chair of Arbory and Rushen Commissioners Kirrie Jenkins said there was ‘deep concern’ by all local authorities at the DoI’s ‘passive acceptance’ of the clause into the Bill, which would create a ‘sweeping power of compulsion’.

‘The department has never explained why clause 5 is needed or how it will be used,’ she said.

Ms Jenkins said the legislation would ‘fundamentally alter’ the relationship between local and central government, replacing ‘trust, consent and community spirit’ with ‘command and control’, making local authorities ‘agents of the department not representatives of their people’.

Bride Parish commissioner Ivan Burton said it was his parish which had ‘unwittingly started all this’ when it withdrew from the Northern Civic Amenity site.

He said: ‘This amendment was passed in haste and anger. Local authorities must be free to decide local issues.’

Leader of Douglas Council Devon Watson said: ‘Fundamentally, by attacking the autonomy and independence of local democracies you break down our ability to constructively work with central government.’

Ramsey Town commissioner Juan McGuinnness said the new clause would ‘replace co-operation with compulsion’ and allow the DoI to ‘dictate’ what services a local authority must provide.

Leazyre Parish commissioner Julian Teare said the clause would ‘open up all local authorities to provide any services demanded by government ministers’.

‘It is not democratic - indeed it would be autocratic for a minister to dictate to a local authority,’ he said. ‘Clause 5 could transfer responsibility for services from taxpayers to ratepayers without any mandate from the electorate.’

Chair of Castletown Town Commissioners and former chief minister Tony Brown said it was ‘fundamentally wrong and flies in the face of our island’s democracy’.

Representatives from Jurby, Michael, Marown, Garff, Braddan and Peel commissioners also made statements calling for the clause to be scrapped.

Infrastructure Minister Dr Michell Haywood insisted: ‘It’s not the department’s intention to force local authorities to carry out a raft of new functions’.

She said that some local authority functions are set out in statute but there are others that are discretionary.

Dr Haywood said: ‘We intent to support the continued delivery of services that communities expect.

‘However, without any statutory mechanism we are concerned that local authorities could decide just to walk away from services. That would help them balance their budgets - just don’t do stuff that ratepayers are paying them to do.’

Following the evidence session, LegCo voted unanimously to move the bill to the clauses stage where it will decide whether to keep, amend or remove the controversial clause from the bill.