Greater London Authority Bill

moved Amendment No. 27: 27: After Clause 16, insert the following new Clause— ““General power for Assembly to call in directions After section 404 of the GLA Act 1999 insert— ““Directions issued by the Mayor 404A Directions issued by the Mayor (1) Before issuing a direction under or by virtue of this Act, the Mayor shall act in accordance with the following subsections. (2) The Mayor shall send a copy of any proposed direction to the Assembly. (3) The Assembly may within 14 days of receiving a copy of any proposed direction recommend that the proposed direction should not be issued or should be issued with such modifications as the Assembly shall determine. (4) The Mayor shall have regard to any recommendation made by the Assembly under subsection (3). (5) The Mayor shall within 14 days of receiving a recommendation made by the Assembly under subsection (3) prepare a statement which must include an explanation setting out the reasons why any recommendation made by the Assembly is not accepted.””.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the amendment proposes a power for the Assembly to call in mayoral directions. When we debated this matter in Committee, it was suggested that that would amount to a veto on the part of the Assembly—a power to block—but that is not the case. Perhaps I may pick up the reference made earlier by the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, to the forward plan which the executive in local government has to propose. That is the basis for certain powers of call-in in local government. I suggest to your Lordships that it will be appropriate for the Assembly to require the executive arm of the Greater London Authority to pause. The Mayor has the power to give directions to Transport for London and the fire authority generally specifically as to the exercise of its functions, to direct them not to do something, to direct them as to the manner in which they should perform their duties and the manner in which to conduct legal proceedings. If a functional body needs a direction, I suggest that, by definition, that direction will be controversial. If there were agreement—general consensus—between the board of the functional body and the Mayor, he would not need to make the direction. There is a slightly different power with regard to the development agency. When I was preparing for today, I realised that my amendment extends to directions by the Mayor to borough councils regarding transport, which would not be a bad thing because we are talking about a pause. There was a concern that the Assembly putting a direction on hold for 21 days while it considered it was too long a period, so I have reduced the period to 14 days. The Minister said then that it would cut across the Mayor’s planning powers. I suppose it would cut across planning and waste. Those are very particular matters; they are quasi-judicial. If the Mayor needs particular scope—we shall come to this matter next week—it needs to be addressed with regard to the particular area of his authority. I find it difficult to think that 14 days would be material in cases of major importance or significance in the planning area. I am not using the terms technically tonight. It is important that the Assembly has the right to ask the Mayor to pause so that the Assembly can consider such a matter, not just in connection with the Mayor’s specific powers under the GLA Act but also under the general, wide power under Section 30 of that Act. As I was challenged about this last time, I have a list of directions that have been given, but it would be tedious to read them out. The exercise of that power could well depend on the Mayor’s judgment. We are talking about pushing at the boundaries of what the Mayor can do under that section. A right to call in directions given under that section is more important than is immediately apparent. As I have said, this amendment was characterised in Committee as a veto. If that is so, I welcome Clause 2—new Section 42A—which relates to the Assembly’s powers under the strategies, even more warmly than I did before. My amendment says that the Mayor should have regard to a recommendation made by the Assembly if a direction is called in, and should explain why a recommendation is not accepted. New Section 42A says that the Mayor must have regard to, and set out the reasons why, the Assembly’s comments are not accepted. In drafting this amendment, I turned to new Section 42A, so if my amendment is as substantial as it was characterised, I had better shut up as I do not want the Government to pull back from new Section 42A. I believe that the real position is that Section 42A is what we all think it is, and that pressing the hold button for two weeks under this amendment so that the Assembly can consider the views does not amount to a veto. It is not a red button but merely a pause button. I beg to move.