Greater London Authority Bill

moved Amendment No. 103A: 103A: Before Clause 36, insert the following new Clause— ““The London Waste and Recycling Forum and Fund (1) There shall be a body corporate to be known as the London Waste and Recycling Forum and Fund (in this section and Schedule (The London Waste and Recycling Forum and Fund) referred to as ““the Forum””). (2) The Forum shall have the following functions— (a) to advise the Mayor of London and London local authorities on matters of strategic importance related to waste minimisation, recycling, waste collection, waste treatment and waste disposal in and for Greater London, (b) to administer a fund to be known as the London Waste and Recycling Fund (in this section and Schedule (The London Waste and Recycling Forum and Fund) referred to as ““the Fund””) the primary purpose of which is to improve and enhance the waste minimisation, recycling, waste collection, waste treatment and waste disposal performance of London local authorities. (3) Schedule (The London Waste and Recycling Forum and Fund) makes provision in relation to the Forum and the Fund. (4) The Secretary of State may, with the consent of Treasury, pay the Forum a grant to be used for the Fund and such other monies as he determines appropriate for the exercise of its functions. (5) For the purposes of this section and Schedule (The London Waste and Recycling Forum and Fund), ““London local authority”” means— (a) a London borough; (b) the Common Council of the City of London; (c) a joint waste disposal authority established under section 10 of the Local Government Act 1985 (c. 51) (joint arrangements for waste disposal functions) which is constituted of London boroughs.”” The noble Baroness said: I shall also speak to Amendment No. 120C. The Public Bill Office has pointed out that these amendments would be better drafted as amendments to the Greater London Authority Act 1999. I give notice that that is what we will do next time, rather than re-tabling them as they are. When the Government announced their final proposals for additional powers for the Mayor and Assembly in July 2006, they decided against creating a single waste authority—we have no disagreement with that—but also that there should be a London-wide waste and recycling forum. The Government policy statement said that this was, "““to bring stakeholders together to deliver improved performance on waste minimisation and recycling, promote collaborative action and link waste with other London priorities around climate change, transport and employment””." There is not a lot of punctuation in that and it is all in inverted commas; somebody must have written it somewhere. The forum would also administer a fund of £25 million from April 2008. The fund would consist of £19 million diverted from local authority waste funding, currently provided through the waste performance and efficiency grant, and £6 million from the Greater London Authority. Much of the debate in the other place on waste in this Bill focused on amendments which sought to create a single waste authority—we will come to that in a minute—in the form of a functional body of the Greater London Authority controlled by the Mayor. Today, we have a slightly different proposal from the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, which will nevertheless create a single waste authority for London. However, all this debate on a single waste authority has obscured the fact that it is now almost 10 months since the Government announced that the London waste and recycling forum would be created. Thereis no sign of this new body or any indication of how it is to be set up, nor has there been any word on what is happening about the new fund which the forum would administer. When taken with Amendment No. 120C, the amendment would ensure that the fund and forum actually happen. London Councils, the representative body of the 32 London boroughs and the City of London, has briefed us on this. It is keen to see the forum. There is great frustration at London Councils that nothing has happened, and great concern that as time ticks away, it will become difficult to start spending the fund when the money becomes available in April 2008. There are four reasons why I propose a specific statutory provision. First, if there is to be a forum and fund, it makes sense to have an incorporated body of some sort which is publicly accountable. The Government have not made clear how they will do this. By creating a clear legal status for the forum, they avoid having an unincorporated body taking decisions on grant funding of projects. Secondly, the amendments would ensure that boroughs have a majority of members on the body which determines the allocation of the fund. This money would largely have otherwise gone directly to the boroughs, so they should have the major say in the operation of the forum and fund. Thirdly, they would ensure the creation and continuity of a London-wide body to consider strategic issues related to waste and to administer a London waste and recycling fund, but would do so in a way which keeps the waste collection and disposal functions in borough-led bodies. Fourthly, they would ensure that there are explicit powers to enable operation of the fund and for the Government to support the fund. This means there is no doubt about the status of the money. The Government have made it clear that they think there should be some kind of strategic overview body in London but that this should not have actual disposal functions. My amendments seek to place this on a statutory footing. I beg to move.