Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Maddock, for moving the amendment. With Amendment 12, noble Lords are trying to address what they perceive to be an omission from the list of bodies to which the duties to promote democracy apply. I understand the intent, and I certainly echo what the noble Baroness said about the experience of the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and the noble Lord, Lord Tope, and their understanding of the assembly and how it responds to its constituency. I am sure that they have seen that it might have a lot to say about democracy and how public input into its decision-making could benefit us all. Let me explain clearly why the Government have explicitly excluded the GLA from the duty to promote democracy in Clause 1. The duty is primarily aimed at encouraging greater understanding of the opportunities that exist for members of the public to get involved in, and influence, the work of local public bodies. The GLA, as the noble Baroness, Lady Warsi, said, is a strategic body. It is important, on these grounds, that Londoners understand the democratic arrangements for the GLA and how they can engage with the work of the authority. City Hall has become central to the political life of London, with the Mayor having a national profile and considerable influence over the strategic direction of the capital and the assembly having a vital role to play in holding him to account on behalf of Londoners. We have provided for that in a way that we think will be more effective, because the provision ensures that information about the GLA is provided to local people at the most appropriate level. Under Clause 2, London boroughs will be required to provide information on the GLA’s functions and democratic arrangements, and we expect the GLA will be happy to provide the necessary information to all boroughs. Amendment 40 is consequential on Amendment 12, but it has the unfortunate effect of releasing the London borough councils from a duty to promote understanding of how the GLA works, how it reaches decisions and what its functions are. That would leave a worrying information gap which would leave Londoners at a disadvantage compared with the rest of the country. The point is that we have placed a duty on the London boroughs because they are in the front line, and they could and should be the first port of call for local people who want to find out about local decision-making. The information they give should provide a comprehensive picture of the democratic landscape, and how the work of councils at different tiers fit together, and that would be impossible without featuring the GLA. Although some people may still go to the GLA for information, we believe that most will go to their local council as the body nearest to their local community. The new duties will allow people to consider their local council as their local ‘hub’ of information about how to participate in and influence democracy. There is another complication. To have the GLA as a principal authority under Clause 1 would mean that it would be under the duty in Clause 2 to promote the functions and democratic arrangements of a wide range of local bodies in London. That would duplicate the work of boroughs which under this duty will be doing the same and would be complicated and confusing without necessarily enlightening or enabling the local community. I hope that I can persuade noble Lords of this and that they will agree that we should retain the GLA as a ““connected authority”” rather than a ““principal authority””.