Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Robert Neill (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 27 February 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Greater London Authority Bill.


Greater London Authority Bill

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. He and I know that the only way that we were able as constituency Assembly members to get a foot in the door with Transport for London was physically that—through jamming our feet in the door, forcing our way through and demanding that we be consulted. That is not a satisfactory way of doing things. That is why one would have hoped for much stronger provision in the Bill to ensure that the appointments of representatives of the principal councils are agreed with the representative body of local government in London. I would have hoped for a few more than a token two members so that there were people who could speak unequivocally on behalf of the boroughs—appointed by the boroughs and ultimately answerable to the boroughs—rather than having just two people who happen to be borough councillors whom the Mayor finds it convenient to appoint because they will not argue too much with him or rock the boat.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
457 c782-3 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Access Costs City of London Council tax Housing Finance Environment Greater London Greater London Authority Infrastructure Functions Landfill Incinerators Local government Planning permission Powers Public appointments Planning Members Railways Recycling Property development Mayor of London Training Transport Waste disposal Waste Underground railways Transport for London London Assembly London Waste Regulation Authority River Thames Pedicabs
Legislation
Greater London Authority Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk