We oppose the Questions whether Clauses 25, 26 and 27 shall stand part of the Bill.
We oppose the changes to the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) membership proposed in Part 5. The current composition has worked very effectively, almost entirely without complaint. The mix of borough representatives and Assembly Members is an appropriate model that we propose should be extended to include the Transport for London board. I do not intend to rehearse all the arguments from our previous debate on the make-up of Transport for London, but noble Lords will remember that the political diversity and, in particular, geographical range that the LFEPA model provides have clear advantages. Why do the Government believe that there should be mayoral appointments to the London fire board? The arguments in favour of allowing two appointees on the board to replace directly elected representatives seem superficial at best. We remain wholly unconvinced by those put forward by my honourable friends in another place.
Clause 27 will allow the Mayor the power to issue directions to LFEPA. Earlier, through Amendment No. 73, we proposed that the Assembly should be able to scrutinise these directions, but the Government would not accept that. It now appears that the Bill is further weakening the London fire authority’s independence from the Mayor by allowing the Mayor to make his own appointments. Can the Minister give an assurance that the Government have no plans again to extend mayoral patronage over the London fire authority at a later stage?
Clause 25 proposes a wholly unwelcome change in the composition of the London fire authority. It would damage democratic accountability, and London councils and the London fire authority oppose it. They have voiced understandable concerns about the motivation of the new non-elected members, as well as about their ability and about how scrupulous the process of their appointments can be. We oppose the Question whether these clauses should stand part of the Bill.
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hanningfield
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c120-1GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:47:07 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394902
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394902
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394902