A very considerable amount but not all of it. I am sure that the noble Lord would be the last to support any politician swept away by an argument about a large part of something, ignoring the bits around the edge that are often of considerable interest. For instance, he will be as familiar as I am with the issue of whether it is necessary to put an amount on the Transport for London budget which gives rise to a precept when there are arguments about whether that is what Londoners want. I do not dispute that a very large part of what has been raised by the precept and a large part of what is spent as a result of government grant is a matter for the MPA budget. I will talk to the Minister outside Committee about that.
In saying that the Mayor is required to respond to the Assembly’s amendments to the first draft budget, I realise that I have supported the noble Baroness’s case more than I intended to. I should have added that the reasons given can be rather dismissive.
The Minister also said that there are implications for other authorities. This is not the place to argue about the comparative arrangements, but my understanding is that in boroughs with a strong leader model the council’s authority is completely different from that of the Assembly. What we have in London is sui generis.
The Minister also said that, because the Assembly will have its own budget—as it will after this Bill is enacted—that will assist the matter. I do not believe that that is an issue for this amendment. People see the Assembly as a check on the Mayor. They are not hugely concerned about the Assembly’s own budget, unless somebody accuses it of being profligate, which can happen, but that is not the heart of the issue.
The noble Lord, Lord Harris, said that I based my argument on the current incumbent not being a subtle person. I do not row back from that comment, but it is not the basis of my argument. I had hoped that I had explained that a recasting of the arrangement—and I accept that it would be such—would still leave a strong Mayor, because he would have executive powers. Indeed, it would be a greater challenge to the Assembly than combining to defeat the budget, because the Assembly would require 50 per cent plus to agree an alternative budget. I have always thought that that was the hardest barrier to overcome.
The noble Baroness, Lady Valentine, talked about how the Mayor spends his money. Another very considerable frustration is that the Assembly is not able to deal with the budget line by line. That explains why this amendment was tabled but it is not a partof it.
I am not surprised by the Minister’s response, but for today, at any rate, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 12 agreed to.
Clause 13 [Procedure for determining Authority’s consolidated budget requirement]:
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c64-5GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:50:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394120
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394120
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394120