Greater London Authority Bill

I support Amendment No. 103 but not Amendment No. 119. I declare an interest as a member of the board of the Environment Agency and as a former member of the board of Ofwat. Amendment No. 103 seems very sensible, and apparently it has, uniquely in this debate, the support of all institutions in London and all political parties in London. From the interface between water strategy and environmental duties, particularly the new climate change duties, it seems obvious that water should form a part of the Mayor’s strategic responsibilities. It is of course true that the Thames Water region and the Thames Water company stretch beyond London. The final version of any such amendment would have to pay some recognition to the fact that a strategy which related to the supply of water would also have to liaise with bodies outside the GLA area. Nevertheless, it is an important part of the Mayor’s environmental duties. I oppose Amendment No. 119, but not because I do not think that Ofwat and Ofgem should appear before the committee. They should, but on a voluntary basis as has always been the case in the past. To make an independent regulator clearly subject to a requirement to appear before a scrutiny body of a local authority—perhaps a big local authority or a regional authority—distorts the role of the regulator. I do not therefore support the amendment proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Tope.