Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Robert Neill (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 December 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Greater London Authority Bill.


Greater London Authority Bill

I apologise for not being in the Chamber at the beginning of the debate. I was stuck in Committee. I acknowledge the right hon. Gentleman’s expertise in these matters, and have known of it for a long time. Does he accept that the logic of his argument should be that the thresholds for any matter that is referable to the Mayor should be raised rather than lowered, to ensure that they are truly strategic and to avoid any needless conflict between the strategic and the operational? Secondly, in terms of the general principle, if the Mayor is to be a planning authority, whether with positive or purely negative powers, on reflection after six years, can it possibly be desirable for a planning authority—in effect, a one-person planning authority—to be given those powers? Would it not be logical for us to look again at the requirement for the Mayor to consult the assembly and the boroughs, and at whether he should be obliged to make his planning decisions in public and in a more transparent fashion?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
454 c775 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Staff Devolved matters Accountability Housing Environment Greater London Greater London Authority Functions Local government Planning permission Pay Powers Pensions Planning Members Mayor of London Local government executive Waste disposal Reform London Assembly Lead Development Association Transport Museum of London Statutory instruments Public health
Legislation
Greater London Authority Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk