| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Clause 35
Lords amendment: No. 32, in page 21, line 27, after first ("to") insert ("the current version of")
Mr. Hill: I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendments Nos. 33 to 40, 48, 153, 213, 268 to 272, 424, 445, 446, 455, 483, 641 and 646.
Mr. Hill: Dealing with those amendments in the time available is an awesome challenge, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They tidy up and extend the arrangements for publicity and for the availability of strategies and other documents. The mayor will be required to keep a copy of the current version of each strategy, and the mayor's guidance document on application for bus service appointments, available for public inspection while they are in force.
The amendments specifying that it is the current version of those documents that should be kept available for inspection respond to concerns raised in Committee in the other place about requiring those documents to be available for a fixed period, which may have been shorter than the time for which they were in force. Following points raised in Committee in the other place, the mayor will have a duty to send each strategy to each London borough and the common council.
The amendments also require the strategies and the bus guidance document to be available for inspection at the GLA's principal offices and at such other places as the mayor considers appropriate, at reasonable hours and free of charge. Again, making the documents available at places other than the GLA's offices is a direct response to Opposition arguments in Committee in the other place.
The mayor will be required to keep copies of his or her annual report, the GLA's budget, substitute calculations--for example, a revised budget--the capital spending plan, Transport for London's annual report and the state of the environment report available for inspection for a period of six years from the date when each was first made available, at reasonable hours and free of charge at the GLA's principal offices.
Any person--that means organisations as well as individual members of the public--will have the right, on request, to be supplied with a copy of any of the documents, such as the strategies and all the other types of document, or any part of any of the documents, for such reasonable fee as the mayor may determine.
The amendments thus improve and extend the arrangements for the availability of published GLA documents, and respond to concerns raised in the other place.
Lords amendment agreed to.
Lords amendments Nos. 33 to 40 agreed to.
Mr. Hill:
I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this, it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendments Nos. 42 to 44, 46, 49 to 53, 58 to 80, 83, 86, 92 to 94, 97 to 102, 116, 117, 576, 581, 636 to 639, 642, 643 and 645.
Further consideration of Lords amendments adjourned.--[Mr. Dowd.]
To be further considered tomorrow.
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Margaret Beckett):
In view of the lack of progress on the Bill tonight, I regret to tell the House that the first business on Monday will be consideration of a supplemental timetable motion to the Greater London Authority Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments. The rest of the business for Monday will be as I announced in my business statement earlier today.
Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire):
This further guillotine motion is yet more evidence of the Government's inability to draft Bills and to managetheir legislative programme. With 818 Government amendments to the Greater London Authority Bill, they have overtaken the record set by the Scotland Bill for the most Government amendments to any legislation.
For poor drafting, the Greater London Authority Bill is without precedent. Moreover, the House finished its business early on Monday and Tuesday this week, but now the Government are having to rush through consideration of their remaining legislation. We have seen no filibustering this afternoon. Serious contributions have been made from right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House.
The announcement about the guillotine means that serious issues about transport in London run the risk of being inadequately considered. How much time will be allotted for debating the remaining sections of the Bill on Monday and what arrangements does the right hon. Lady propose to make for discussing the Food Standards Agency Bill? Is not the announcement she has just made an insult to London and to Londoners?
Mrs. Beckett:
That is absolutely ridiculous, as the right hon. Gentleman knows. The Government have not hitherto sought to draw debate on the Bill to a close. Indeed, we have had agreed progress of business throughout the previous consideration of the legislation. We offered a programme motion today and we sought reasonably rapid progress, but we have disposed of only six out of 56 groups of amendments. I remind the House, and those Opposition Members who probably do not know much about the Bill, that the Government have sought to reverse only one amendment made in the other place, although some amendments have been tidied up to bring them into order, as the House would expect.
The right hon. Gentleman said that there was no filibuster, but the first group of amendments today covered an issue that has already been extensively aired in the House in previous consideration of the Bill. The debate took four hours.
Mr. Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove):
Does the Leader of the House not recognise that the Government brought to the House the most complicated Bill--with the largest number of clauses and schedules perhaps ever, and certainly for a long time--and we have a booklet containing 820 amendments from the other place over 197 pages? For right hon. and hon. Members to spend a little time considering those amendments and putting their views to the House is entirely proper and in order.
We have seen no filibuster, but we have had sensible, sound discussion. Does the Leader of the House not recognise that, with 56 groups of amendments--50 of which are still outstanding--it is outrageous for the House to be expected to complete that business in one day? Will she consider extending the length of time available to Members to deal with the Bill?
Mrs. Beckett:
We did the devolution legislation, which was also long and complex, on programme motions. The Government are prepared, and happy, to agree programme motions and the sensible progress of business. The hon. Gentleman is a newer Member and will not recall, for example, the passage of the Railways Act 1993 or the Water Act 1989. Those Bills were less than half the size of the Greater London Authority Bill and hundreds of amendments were tabled to them. In the case of the Railways Act 1993, some 470 amendments came back to the Commons.
We allowed two full days. We were perfectly prepared to make progress, and we hoped to make progress reasonably rapidly. I can tell the hon. Gentleman only that we have not done so.
Mr. Peter Brooke (Cities of London and Westminster):
The Leader of the House conceded at business questions this morning that there were problems with the Bill and, by my standards, I behaved like a Trappist monk this afternoon. Will the Leader of the House say how much time she is going to give us for the rest of the very dense business that remains to be done?
Mrs. Beckett:
The motion to be tabled tomorrow will be discussed through the usual channels. However, the right hon. Gentleman will know that we are trying, as we have tried throughout, to arrange discussion of the Bill so that major issues can be properly considered. We shall continue to do so.
Mr. Christopher Leslie (Shipley):
I have been in and out of the Chamber all day, and have listened to all of today's debate. I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the programme motion. The wittering of Opposition Members is astonishing to hear, and their crocodile tears continue to flow. I welcome the motion and hope that we will see more sensible management of Government business for the rest of the Parliament.
Mrs. Beckett:
Well, we all share that hope. I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The Government are always keen to proceed through agreement, proper discussion and properly tabled debate. However, there are times when the Government recognise that that progress cannot be achieved without a guillotine motion.
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst):
No doubt for the best of reasons, the Leader of the House has not been in the Chamber at all during today's proceedings. Nevertheless, the right hon. Lady has asserted that there
Lords amendment: No. 41, in page 22, line 2, after ("three") insert ("clear working")
7 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |