My Lords, as has been mentioned, this amendment follows quite a lot of discussion in Committee and on Report, and we have spent a fair time going over this ground. It is true that the Greater London Assembly is elected to represent the interests of the people of London, so it is rather silly that it can be over-ridden without a mandate. London does not have a presidency any more than the country does.
It is a great shame that the amendment was not able to be included in the Bill or accepted by the Government at an earlier stage. Perhaps this is one of the problems emanating from the Grand Committee procedure, whereby voting can take place only on Report. However, we have read the advice from the Clerks and I know that there is controversy over the admissibility of amendments at Third Reading when they have been debated at other stages. We shall need to reflect on this for the future, but I thought that I would tell the House that at this point, if the amendment is pressed, the Front Bench—or, rather, all of us—will have to abstain.
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 9 October 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
695 c128-9 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:21:34 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_415828
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_415828
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_415828