| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means: With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 5, in page 1, line 11, leave out 'question' and insert 'questions'. No. 18, in page 1, line 11, leave out 'question' and insert 'two questions'. No. 12, in schedule, page 6, line 2, leave out from 'Paper' to end and add--
'Q1. Are you in favour of regional government for London exercised by an elected Greater London Authority?
Put a cross (X) in one box:
YES
NO
Q2. Are you in favour of the Greater London Authority made up of:
(A) an elected assembly with a mayor elected from the assembly; or
(B) an elected assembly and a separately elected mayor.
Put a cross (X) in the box of your choice.'.
No. 19, in schedule, page 6, line 3, leave out from 'paper' to end and add--
'Q.1. Are you in favour of a directly elected mayor for Greater London?
Yes
No
Q.2. Are you in favour of a directly elected assembly for Greater London?
No'.
Mr. Hughes: We have reached what is probably the most important debate in Committee, as it deals with a fundamental matter--what the electorate in London will be asked in a referendum. The Liberal Democrats are strongly in favour of regional government, and we hope that it is approved by the electors in the English regions. We are happy that the referendum in London will take place on 7 May next year, and that democratically elected local government will be restored. I would go further, and say that the Greater London council was not securely established regional government, but developed from the old London county council. We are pleased that we stood on the same platform as the Government and supported regional government in London. We shall certainly continue pushing for regional government in London to be followed by regional government elsewhere in England.
Mr. Hughes: There will be not more but fewer bureaucrats, who will certainly have much more accountability than there is now or than there ever was under the Conservative Government, who handed over London government to people who were unseen and unknown, sitting in Government offices and running huge budgets. They were never elected, or able to be removed, by the people in whose name they acted and who paid their wages.
Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough): As it happens, I voted to retain the Greater London council. I hope that the hon. Gentleman recognises that the arguments for London are very different from those for the regions. Let us take the east midlands. People in Lincolnshire have no desire to be run by Leicester. Does he accept that the arguments for London are quite different from those for elsewhere in the country?
7.30 pm
Mr. Hughes: I accept what the hon. Gentleman says. As I recollect, he was a member of the GLC some time ago in his pre-Lincolnshire life.
London is different for two reasons: it is a capital city, and it has a history of regional government. My party has been absolutely clear that, although it believes that the powers exercised in his part of the world in, for example, the health service, which is controversial in Lincolnshire, by officials in the regional outpost of the NHS should be exercised by democratically elected people, none the less, regional government should not go ahead in Lincolnshire without the authority and approbation of the people--not least because it is one of those counties that does not naturally belong in a region as easily as some.
This week there was a lobby for the north led by the hon. Member for Morley and Rothwell (Mr. Gunnell). Perhaps people in the north want regional government more acutely and more urgently. There are the boundaries of the south-west, Cornwall and the north-east. I accept what the hon. Gentleman says. London therefore rightfully comes first.
The Liberal Democrats are proud that, before the election, my right hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Mr. Maclennan) and the then right hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) came to an agreement that there should be a programme of regional government. The Cook-Maclennan joint consultative committee was set up by the two party leaders--it was not easy in negotiation--and concluded:
The Liberal Democrats are strong believers in real devolution from Whitehall to the regions. The issue for us is not about local government giving up powers. In my book, local government should hold the powers it has--although I have arguments about its structure. The right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh) and others prompt me to say that the issue is about taking power from civil servants and central Government and giving it to elected people at a regional level.
My hon. Friends and I are clear that, above all in London--the arguments are overwhelming--regional government needs to be fairly elected; for without that, it will not be seen to be clearly representative. If we end up with an electoral system or an elected assembly which could, for example, mean that the government of London was run by a minority political view, we risk the authority's abolition in a very short time.
My hon. Friends and I are strong in the view--we are different from the Government in this respect--that the authority should have tax-varying powers. We do not back off from that; we think that that is proper. Tax raised from London taxpayers goes into a national kitty. It is allocated by central Government to the regions, and spent on services in the regions. We hope that, in time, taxes raised from Londoners for services given to Londoners should be decided by Londoners. [Hon. Members: "Oh."] That does not necessarily mean--before Conservative Members say it does--a penny extra in taxes.
Mr. Hughes:
It does not. The right hon. Gentleman must know that, as a matter of logic and honesty. If we give some of the central Government administration to regional government and give the power to collect money from the region, the total could be exactly the same. Indeed, the cost might go down. Perhaps regional government is more efficient than central Government.
Mr. Wilkinson:
Will the hon. Gentleman clarify that? Liberal Democrat spokesmen have traditionally argued that a small local supplement on income tax would be necessary to fund regional government. In the case of London, are the Liberal Democrats flying in the face of
Mr. Hughes:
The hon. Gentleman has reminded me that I promised him a copy of our proposals. I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Dr. Tonge) will help by giving them to him now, so that he can read the full monty and not have to hear a summary from me. There is plenty of time to read them before the Committee sits again. I apologise for not giving him the proposals earlier.
There are a variety of ways in which we can collect money for London, but we believe, as the Government argue--
The First Deputy Chairman (Mr. Michael J. Martin):
Order. Perhaps I can help the hon. Gentleman. The amendments are nothing to do with collecting money or raising taxes. He must stick to the subject of the amendments that he has tabled.
Mr. Hughes:
I was distracted, as you saw, Mr. Martin, by the intervention of the hon. Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. Wilkinson). I accept your rebuke, and return to the straight and narrow, as always.
The central matter of the debate is whether we have a mayor elected from a London-wide assembly and accountable to it, or whether we have a directly elected mayor. Our amendments relate both to the clause and the schedule. We Liberal Democrats are not in favour of a take-it-or-leave-it proposal. We are in favour of posing the questions to the electorate, but we are not in favour of denying the electorate the right to give answers.
"Both parties endorse the establishment of an elected authority for London, with the consent of the people of London in a referendum, which would act as a powerful voice for the capital and work with the boroughs and other organisations in London."
Then came the point on which the two parties differed. The Labour party also proposed an elected mayor for London. We acknowledge--and did so then--that there is a difference of view about one of the key aspects. For us, today's debate is about the package; what proposal will be put to the electorate in May next year.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |