Greater London Authority Bill

moved Amendment No. 1: 1: After Clause 18, insert the following new Clause— ““General power for Assembly to call in directions After section 404 of the GLA Act 1999 (discrimination) insert— ““404A Directions issued by the Mayor (1) Subject to subsection (2) below, the Mayor may only issue a direction under or by virtue of this Act, if— (a) the Mayor has sent a written copy of any proposed direction to the Assembly; (b) the Assembly has had 14 days from the date of receiving a copy of the proposed direction to make recommendations that the proposed direction should not be issued or should be issued with such modifications as the Assembly shall determine; (c) the Mayor has had regard to any recommendation made by the Assembly under paragraph (b) above; and (d) the Mayor has provided the Assembly with a written statement explaining why he has decided not to accept, to any extent, any recommendation made by the Assembly. (2) Subsection (1) does not apply where the Mayor provides the Authority’s Monitoring Officer with a copy of a proposed direction, and the Authority’s Monitoring Officer determines that any delay in issuing the proposed direction that is likely to be caused by complying with the requirements of subsection (1) would seriously prejudice the interests of the public, the Authority, or the body to whom it is intended that the proposed direction will be issued. (3) The Authority’s Monitoring Officer must notify the Mayor and the Chair of the Assembly when a determination under subsection (2) above has been made.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 2. The Public Bill Office has quite properly drawn your Lordships’ attention to the fact that the amendment is similar to one debated at an earlier stage. I have made the point again through this amendment, which picks up substantially the wording of the earlier versions. In particular, proposed new Clause 404A(2) deals with a point that the Government astutely made in their response on Report. I said then that they had a good point and had given me an idea for amending my amendment and bringing it back at this stage. This amendment deals with the Mayor’s powers of direction and the role of the London Assembly in regard to them. The Mayor has powers to issue directions to Transport for London and the development agency, and he will have power to issue directions to the fire authority. The London Assembly has the job of holding the Mayor to account, which, during the seven and a half years when I have been a Member, I have decided means bringing matters into the public domain and ensuring debates at relevant moments. The Greater London Authority Act 1999 provides for the London Assembly’s duties and my proposals are squarely in line with those duties and functions. I propose not a veto, which is how the amendment has been characterised, but the right of the Assembly to debate the matter—with 14 days’ notice, in effect—and to make recommendations to the Mayor. Recommendations, of course, are not a veto. The Mayor would then be required to explain to the Assembly why he had decided not to accept a recommendation made by the Assembly. The 14-day period has been brought down during discussion on the Bill. The Minister said previously that 14 days’ notice would cramp the Mayor’s ability to issue urgent directions, and I thought that not precluding urgent directions was a good point. Nevertheless, we should bear in mind that if the Mayor gets to the point of issuing a direction to the functional bodies, which in one case he chairs and in other cases he appoints members to, that must indicate that a controversial issue is on the table, otherwise there would be no need to issue a direction. In order to meet the urgency point, I have proposed new subsections (2) and (3), which would allow the Greater London Authority’s monitoring officer—a statutory post concerned with standards of conduct and so on—to certify that a matter is more urgent than this procedure is suitable for. At the previous stage of the Bill, a specific example was given of the Mayor’s powers under the Mayor of London order 2000 to deal with planning applications. I shall not go into the detail of the order or the detail of what the new order will be, but he has powers in regard to planning. I thought that it would be inappropriate to seek to put in primary legislation a reference to secondary legislation, so I have not referred in the amendment to the provision mentioned by the noble Baroness. However, I believe that the way in which the amendment is drafted meets that point. I beg to move.