Greater London Authority Bill

Fairly early on in his introduction of the amendment, the noble Lord said that he was in favour of London having a strong mayoral model. I am not sure that it is necessary to support that point of view, because we already have a strong mayoral model. That aside, there is a great deal of practical sense in what he has said. He will not be surprised to have my support for this, or indeed for anything that enables the check and balance that was part of the original design to have more teeth—if a check and balance can have teeth. It is interesting to compare what might happen when the Assembly deals with a strategy with the way in which the budget is dealt with. The noble Lord is right to point to consensus. One of the problems with the budget being one of the checks and balancesis that the different political groups have in some cases entrenched positions on particular aspects of spending that are quite hard to move away from. The model that he has suggested might be made to work. I say this slightly diffidently, because I know that one should not be too optimistic about people falling into line and reaching consensus. Although I have always approached politics in that way, I have been proved to be naïve time and time again. The proposal could be of considerable value, although possibly not at the point described in the amendment. The mechanism proposed would focus minds at an earlier stage. Whichever way one looks at it, knowing that this is a hurdle to be surmounted should from the very beginning ensure consensusin the minds of those promoting different parts ofthe different strategies. The mindset to which the amendment could give rise is important, and I am grateful to the noble Lord for raising the issue after we addressed similar points earlier on and at this stage in our consideration of this part of the Bill.