Greater London Authority Bill

I was about to moveon to precisely that point, and say that that was a benefit of my amendment. Giving the Assembly responsibilities—fairly limited responsibilities—in this area will lead to greater engagement by the boroughs with the Assembly Members. It will lead to greater engagement by the public of London with the Assembly, given that they will recognise that this is a route by which they can exert some direct influence on the mayoral strategies. The question is whether this fundamentally alters the balance of power. The Minister cited a number of examples of why this was different. She dismissed the argument that because this power exists for the budget it could not simply be transferred across to the strategies, because that might undermine specific mayoral manifesto commitments. I make the point that if the Mayor has made a specific mayoral commitment, then the chances of there being a two-thirds majority on the Assembly—an Assembly elected on the same day as the Mayor of London—against specific mayoral commitments is extremely low. Apart from the fact that the Mayor is likely to have colleagues from his or her own party—I appreciate that when the present Mayor was first elected, he did not have that advantage—it is unlikely that a Mayor with specific manifesto commitments will find them undermined by a cross-party consensus across two-thirds of the London Assembly. It is difficult to see how the arithmetic is likely to work. You can conceive of circumstances in which there would be unholy alliances between some people who say, ““If you vote against this line of this strategy for us, we will vote against this line for you,”” and so on. You can see how that might create a position in which a two-thirds majority might be assembled. However, I would hope that London Assembly Members had a greater interest in the future of London and a greater responsibility towards what they are trying to do than to fall into that particular trap. Over and above the welcome extensions to the Assembly’s responsibilities that have been included in Clause 2 and some of the other changes that have been made, this is about finding a way of ensuring that the Assembly is given a real purpose in life, which it currently lacks, that would not fundamentally undermine the principle of a strong Mayor. That is why I tabled the amendment. I have listened very carefully to the arguments put by my noble friend Lord Campbell-Savours and the Minister, and I will consider them, but I also hope that the Minister will think about whether something can be done both to give the Assembly more purpose and, while ensuring that there is a strong mayoral model, to make it possible for the Assembly to exercise slightly more of a check and balance on the content of policy. Having said all that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 50 [Orders]: