Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (Additional Authorities) Order 2007

My Lords, in view of the exchange at the end of the last short debate, in declaring an interest I will not describe myself as a stakeholder, a term that I, too, dislike very much. However, I have to declare an interest as a member and currently the chair of the London Assembly, which is one of the constituent arms of the Greater London Authority and therefore will be affected by this order. The Assembly is a scrutiny body rather than one with executive powers, so the order will not affect it to the same extent as it will the Mayor in the discharge of his executive functions. I have checked with the Mayor’s office and discovered that he supports the order. I also asked my noble friend Lord Tope—I acknowledge what the Minister said about this order not extending to crime and disorder reduction partnerships; my noble friend is a member of one—what this would add to the duties under Section 30 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999, which covers economic and social development. My noble friend replied by saying, ““Not much””, but suggested that I might get a longer response from the Government. But I wonder what it adds and my question is, ““Why now?””. The answer may be that this is a tidying-up exercise following the White Paper, to which the Minister referred. I think that the Minister has answered my final question, but nevertheless I shall ask it. The Explanatory Memorandum talks about putting, "““community safety at the heart of decisions made by both the Mayor and the Assembly””." We are not accustomed to reading that sort of phrase in legislation. Indeed, if I may say so, it is rather a new Labour term. It raises this question: how can everything be at the heart of something? I think that the answer may be that it is complementary; perhaps another way of looking at it is to say that local government and London strategic government and its functional bodies need to be big-hearted. I should have made it clear that I welcome the order, but I conclude by remarking that I am glad to see the use of the term ““community safety””. It is much more productive to use positive phrases than to talk about crime and disorder. In so far as this order will support the promotion of community safety, from these Benches I support it.