HL Deb 21 October 1999 vol 605 cc1350-4

(" . The Assembly shall debate annually the report and accounts of the London Development Agency.").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, Amendment No. 533A deals with a simple and basic point. It may be that the Minister will tell me that it is otiose—to borrow someone else's word—or unnecessary.

This small amendment requires that the London assembly shall debate annually the report and accounts of the London Development Agency. It may be deemed inconceivable that that would not happen, but it does not have to happen. The London Development Agency could submit its report to the assembly quietly and it could be quietly buried. That is not what should happen. The amendment seeks to ensure that it does not happen. I beg to move.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton

My Lords, by virtue of Clause 116, the assembly will receive a copy of any reports prepared by the LDA's chief finance officer under Section 114 of the Local Government Act 1988. These are reports on losses, unlawful expenditure or items of account, and the likelihood that expenditure will exceed resources. Furthermore, under Clause 121, the LDA will have to provide the authority with such information about its accounts as the mayor shall request so that the authority can prepare its summary statement of account under Clause 120 for the GLA and the functional bodies as a whole. Therefore, the assembly will have ample opportunity to debate reports on financial matters and the LDA's accounts. We all anticipate a co-operative and peaceful relationship between the mayor, the assembly and the LDA. For the noble Lord to imply that it could come to the point where the scrutiny function is not carried out is not realistic.

The assembly has a power under Clause 49 to keep under review the exercise by the mayor of the statutory functions exercisable by him. Given the powers of appointment and direction which the mayor has over the LDA, the assembly will be able to hold regular debates. Requiring the assembly to debate the LDA's reports and accounts is unnecessary and would serve only to cloud its responsibilities. I hope that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendment.

Lord Dixon-Smith

My Lords, I fail to understand why the fact that the assembly might debate the report and accounts of the LDA should cloud matters. I should have thought that, if anything, it would be more likely to cast light on the subject. None the less, I accept that in the way of the world it is unlikely that when the assembly receives the reports—in particular, when it looks at what the LDA is doing in relation to preparation of the draft consolidated budget—it will not go into the London Development Agency report and accounts in considerable detail.

It is on that basis that I am prepared to withdraw the amendment, rather than for the reason that it might cloud an issue. I do not believe that that would happen. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 20 [Further amendments of the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998]:

Lord Dixon-Smith moved Amendment No. 533B: Page 300, line 18, leave out from ("to") to end of line 19 and insert ("London where the London Development Agency shall have regard to the views of and regularly consult small, medium and large businesses in London and their representative bodies."").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment returns to a theme on which we have touched time and time again as regards the need for thorough consultation between the representative bodies of small, medium and large businesses in London and the LDA. There are some half a million businesses in London, give or take a few. There are so many small businesses that it is difficult to know the exact figure. Most of those businesses are small and medium sized. It is a fact that most such businesses do not generally have representative bodies which can adequately put forward their point of view. None the less, such businesses form a large and significant part of any urban economy and deserve to be taken most thoroughly into account.

I do not apologise for tabling the amendment yet again. I wish that the Government would see the force of it, although I do not doubt that they will say that the consultation will be Utopian and that there is no problem here. I beg to move.

Lord Berkeley

My Lords, I rise to speak to the amendment slightly late in the day. I find it a little superfluous to put into the Bill the need to consult small, medium-sized and large businesses. Noble Lords may be aware that Sub-Committee B of the Select Committee on the European Communities, of which I have the honour to be a member, is looking into the needs of SMEs and the help they receive from Brussels. We have been debating the matter for some time and it is hoped that we shall produce a paving report before the end of the Session. Therefore, I wonder whether it is necessary to include this level of detail.

There are, of course, a significant number of organisations that do look after small businesses as well as large ones. The sub-committee examined the point again this morning and I believe that it is true to say that their views are well represented. I certainly do not believe that it is necessary to go into the level of detail required by this amendment.

6.45 p.m.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, partly for the reasons given by my noble friend Lord Berkeley and partly for the reason that very early in the Bill, starting at Clause 25, and throughout it we have built in provisions for consultation between the mayor, the functional bodies and the business community—I believe that I gave a positive reassurance on the matter to the noble Lord, Lord Sheppard of Didgemere, earlier in the Report stage—I can say that we are absolutely committed to full consultation with the business community at all levels. There is an additional reason why this would not be an appropriate point to build in such a provision; namely, the amendment relates to paragraph 3 of Schedule 20 which amends the Regional Development Agencies Act in relation to regional chambers. Clearly, a body consisting solely of business interests is not the equivalent of regional chambers in the other regions of England. For that reason, it would not be appropriate to insert such a provision at that point of the Bill.

I have expressed the view several times during the course of our deliberations on the Bill that we are committed clearly, absolutely and more than sufficiently to consultation with business.

Lord Dixon-Smith

My Lords, I hope that the Minister will forgive me, but it gives me pleasure to hear him reiterate his points on consultation. It is good also to hear the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, when he assures us that the mechanisms already exist. I am an infinite sceptic, because however good things are, they can always be improved. It is because things can always be improved that I continue to press so often on the same subjects. That ensures that the improvement process is likely to happen. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Lord Dixon-Smith

had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 533C: Page 302, line 9, leave out paragraph 14.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment deals with the boundaries of the London Development Agency. As drafted, the Bill fixes that boundary for all time unless subsequent primary legislation is passed, and it is a fact that that is not the general situation. I know that we have debated the matter before, but I reiterate the argument. However, on this occasion I shall spare the Minister the trouble of responding to me by not moving the amendment.

[Amendment No. 533C not moved.]

Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 534: Page 302, line 23, at end insert—

("Power to promote or oppose Bills in Parliament

After section 26 there shall be inserted—

"Power to promote or oppose Bills in Parliament

26A.—(1) The London Development Agency—

  1. (a) may promote Bills in Parliament; and
  2. (b) may oppose any Bill in Parliament.

(2) Subsection (1)(a) applies only if the Mayor of London—

  1. (a) gives his written consent to the Bill; and
  2. (b) confirms that consent in writing as soon as practicable after the expiration of 14 days after the Bill has been deposited in Parliament.

(3) If the Mayor of London does not confirm the consent as required by subsection (2)(b), he shall give notice of that fact to the London Development Agency, which shall take all necessary steps for the withdrawal of the Bill.

(4) If the Mayor of London, in giving notice under subsection (3), states that he confirms his consent to the Bill if provisions specified in the notice are omitted or are amended as so specified, the London Development Agency may, instead of withdrawing the Bill pursuant to subsection (3), take all necessary steps for the omission or, as the case may be, the amendment of the provisions in question in accordance with the notice.

(5) Without prejudice to subsections (2) to (4), the functions conferred on the London Development Agency by subsection (1)(a) are exercisable subject to, and in accordance with, the provisions of Schedule 6A.

(6) Subsection (1)(b) applies only if the Mayor of London gives his written consent to the London Development Agency to oppose the Bill.

(7) If—

  1. (a) the London Development Agency deposits a petition against a Bill in Parliament, but
  2. (b) the consent required by subsection (6) has not been given before the end of the period of 30 days following the day on which the petition is deposited,
the London Development Agency shall take all necessary steps for the withdrawal of the petition.

(8) Before exercising the functions conferred by subsection (2)(a) or (b), (4) or (6), the Mayor of London shall consult the London Assembly.

(9) This section is without prejudice to any power to promote or oppose Bills in Parliament which a regional development agency other than the London Development Agency may have apart from this section.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 534A and 534B not moved.]

Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 534C: Page 303, line 25, leave out sub-paragraph (5) and insert— ("(5) After paragraph 3 (remuneration, pensions etc) there shall be inserted—

Application of paragraph 3 in relation to the London

Development Agency

3A.—(1) Payments by way of remuneration or allowances, other than allowances in respect of expenses incurred in the exercise of their functions, shall not be made under paragraph 3(1) to members of the London Development Agency who are also members of the London Assembly.

(2) The payments that may be made to or in respect of a person—

  1. (a) under paragraph 3(2)(a) or (b), or
  2. (b) under a scheme provided or maintained under paragraph 3(2)(c),
do not include payments referable to periods when the person is or was a member of both the London Development Agency and the London Assembly.

(3) In the application of paragraph 3 in relation to the London Development Agency, the references to the Secretary of State shall be taken as references to the Mayor of London.".").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, I beg to move that further consideration on Report be now adjourned.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question. Motion agreed to.

Forward to