Of course, my hon. Friend is right. I am trying to say that ordinary people suffer the consequences of lowest common denominator development. Neither the developer nor the Mayor has to live in those little boxes or suffer the pressures that they create. The Committee might therefore consider introducing a developer’s report card, which would be published. Tenants of buildings with a mayoral granting of application could be interviewed one, two, five and 10 years after they had moved in. The scores that they gave could be published and considered when determining whether that developer’s applications should be granted in future.
In a review of the Mayor’s positive directions, let us examine whether conditions attached to developments that get the go-ahead are enforced. When permission is given, or when local wishes are overturned on appeal—possibly with the Mayor’s name used in vain to support the application—the council must enforce a decision on an application that it originally rejected. It might be better if Mayor Livingstone were responsible for the enforcement and its costs, not the council—in the case of Hornsey and Wood Green, a Labour council. It is not therefore a partisan matter; the Mayor has no such regrets about overturning decisions when it suits.
Let us have a right of appeal for ordinary people. Such safeguards might be of real use in ensuring that developers cannot get away with the worst possible conditions and the Mayor cannot run roughshod over local concerns without any consequences. When conditions are attached at mayoral level, the Mayor should be responsible for dealing with them and subject to punitive arrangements if he does not do so.
There is already a presumption in favour of development, and poor old local people have the deck stacked against them. Unless qualifying criteria hold the Mayor in check, the proposal could make the position worse. Developers will always seek to maximise their profits and the number of units for which they apply. That, along with pressure from the London Mayor in relation to the London plan and Government policy, makes it hard for local authorities to stand up for local people. Unless hundreds of people are involved in a campaign, it is hard to reject an application.
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Featherstone
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 December 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
454 c811-2 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:43:07 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365014
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365014
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365014