Greater London Authority Bill

Like my noble friend Lord Harris, I have no objection to the Mayor having certain powers. We have all been in public life and local authority life for many, many years. Over the years, I have, as a chairman and a leader, had to give the outcome of consultations. Sometimes they were received well and sometimes they were not, but that is the name of the game. It would be new to me if the words used in the amendment assuaged feelings about an outcome with which we disagreed, because when people fully participate in a consultation and express a view, they rarely accept that the logic of what they have said has been considered carefully but rejected. Indeed, they often feel—the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, used this phrase more than once—completely ignored. Someone may listen to another, opposing point of view but stick to his original point of view. He has not been moved. That does not mean that the other's point of view has been ignored. The painful fact is that you win some, you lose some; so I will be interested to hear the Minister's view of the amendment and whether it would eventually strengthen the general view that there should be the widest possible consultation. It is right that there should be a strategy and an understanding. It is also right that the Mayor should accept responsibility for explaining in public and in consultation what moves the policy, but we will get nowhere by using a form of words that would make the Mayor bound to do certain things. The Mayor, of course, has powers, and provided that what he is asked to do within those powers is democratic and sensible, I have no objection to them.