UK Parliament / Open data

Greater London Authority Bill

This is a very interesting proposal. In fact, it is so interesting that I think it was raised—and, at one stage, had a degree of government support—when it was first proposed that London should bid for the Olympics. It was recognised that the potential disruptive effect of a mayoral election a matter of weeks before the Olympics would not be entirely helpful to a successful event. I am not sure that I support the argument of the noble Lord, Lord Sheikh, about the coterie of advisers who will surround the Mayor in office at the time and the deleterious effect of some of them disappearing. I do not believe that that would be the critical factor. The critical factor will be that the ODA and LOCOG, which are already in place, will have permanent people acting for them and that will not necessarily be subject to a change of Mayor. We should envisage what sort of mayoral campaign would take place immediately before the Olympic Games. It would be nice to imagine that there would be the sort of cross-party unity and lovefest that has been suggested, but I suspect that, given the pettiness that sometimes affects party politics, we might find one candidate arguing very strongly that the Olympic Games should have a different flavour or that there should be some major change in direction at a time when there will be a flat-out effort to ensure that everything is ready and that it really is the greatest Olympic Games of all time, as I am confident it will be. It would be unhelpful to have an election a few weeks before the Games. I can see the attractions of the noble Baroness’s suggestion of bringing it forward or putting it back a year but, whatever change is made, it is important to indicate clearly that the normal cycle of elections would then revert to the one that started in 2000 and continued in 2004 and 2008. This would simply be a blip to recognise a unique event in the life of this city—the Olympic Games—and the fact that a distraction involving an election in that period would not be entirely helpful.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

691 c82-3GC 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top