Greater London Authority Bill

On the whole, I support the line taken by London Councils. I have previously declared an interest as a joint president. My two amendments in this group are Amendments Nos. 86A and 87A. This has been an omission—I was going to going to say a casus omissus, but one must not use Latin phrases. The reference is to special authorities. The amendments would require the Mayor to take account of the particular circumstances of any area within Greater London that is a special authority when preparing his strategy. It may not be immediately apparent to all noble Lords what that means. ““Special authority”” is a term used in local government finance legislation to describe a local government area that is principally a business district. For the cognoscenti, the precise definition is to be found in Section 144 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988, which is referred to in Amendment No. 87A. A special authority is entitled to levy a local rate, reflecting the fact that the area is mainly covered by business. I should mention in parenthesis that the Lyons report recommended that this arrangement should continue. The only special authority in local government is the City of London. As Members will not need to be told, the City is not like any other part of London; the number of residents is tiny—in fact, in the whole of the City it is less than in the smallest ward of the City of Westminster. There are only just over 9,000 people—although that is based on a fairly old census. The City is wholly atypical in having a business voting system that bears similarities to the voting system applied to the setting-up of business improvement districts, which the Government introduced. I cannot resist adding that in doing so they almost exactly copied a Bill that I introduced a couple of years before—but that is history. The fact is that the voting system in the City is different. It is governed by a private Act from 2002, which I took through the Chamber. Because the City is mainly an environment for doing business and has a very small population, it follows that the amount of residential housing that can be provided inside the boundary is of necessity limited. I should add that the City Corporation has a long history of providing housing outside the boundaries; it still does so, and there is no issue about provision of housing that way. Clause 28 inserts a new subsection 7(a) into new Section 333A of the Greater London Authority Act and requires the Mayor to take account of the effect of his strategy on areas adjoining Greater London. However, it does not require him to take account of the effect on areas inside Greater London, even where, as in the case of the City, the circumstances are so different from those of the London boroughs. I referred to the City’s importance as an international financial centre that brings great benefits to London and to the national economy. Therefore Amendment No. 86A is right and should be accepted because it asks the Mayor to take account of any effect on special authorities, which in this case would be the City. In commending this amendment to the Minister, I hope that she will look at it sympathetically.