Greater London Authority Bill

moved Amendment No. 72: 72: After Clause 27, insert the following new Clause— ““Greater London Authority to be police authority for London (1) The Police Act 1996 (c. 16) is amended as follows. (2) After section 5A (maintenance of metropolitan police force) insert— ““5AA Police authority for London (1) The Greater London Authority shall be the police authority for the metropolitan police district. (2) All executive functions in respect of the role of the Greater London Authority as a police authority shall be carried out by the Mayor of London. (3) The London Assembly shall have power to scrutinise the exercise of the Mayor’s functions under subsection (2) above and carry out all scrutiny of the work of the police force as was previously carried out by the Metropolitan Police Authority. (4) All references to the Metropolitan Police Authority in this and any other enactment shall be construed in accordance with this section. 5AB Budget The Mayor shall set the component part of the GLA budget previously set by the Metropolitan Police Authority. 5AC Assembly Police Committee (1) The London Assembly shall establish a committee to carry out its functions under section 5AA(3) above. (2) Four magistrates, appointed in the same manner as magistrate members of the Metropolitan Police Authority were, shall be co-opted members of this committee.”” (3) Leave out sections 5B and 5C and Schedule 2A.”” The noble Lord said: This group of amendments would give more powers to the Mayor. The new clauses they propose relate to the GLA’s role in policing in London. Amendment No. 72 would make the GLA the capital’s police authority, while Amendments Nos. 74 and 75 would give the Mayor and, to a lesser extent, the Assembly a say in the appointment of the commissioner and deputy commissioner of the metropolitan area. The driving force behind each of these proposals is to increase accountability for policing in London. By accepting Amendment No. 72, the Government would place as the authority a body that was answerable to Londoners—the very people it is supposed to protect. It is not uncommon around the world to have some form of democratic accountability for police authorities, whether through the election of senior police figures or other means. Although the GLA would clearly be judged at the polls on many things other than its performance in policing, this would certainly provide an opportunity for the public to register any disapproval. The proposals in Amendments Nos. 74 and 75 may prove more palatable. Amendment No. 74 provides for the appointment of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis. It would compel the Secretary of State to have regard to any recommendations made to him by the Mayor, as well as any representations made by the London Assembly. Amendment No. 75 would also ensure a role for the Mayor in the appointment of the deputy commissioner. These powers would not extend beyond recommendations but would represent an improvement on the current system of patronage. Just as we support the involvement of the boroughs in local matters for which they are largely responsible and where their reputation will be most affected, so we think it is right that the GLA should have some involvement in policing in the capital. I hope that the Government will no longer accuse us of indiscriminately attempting to strip the Mayor of powers at every possible opportunity. Where there is justification for increased involvement, we have always said that we will support it. I beg to move.