CHANGES IN LONDON?

Sally Hamwee writes: The Mayor's new planning powers were discussed in the Lords last week. Under the GLA Bill and an Order (now in final form but to be made later) the Mayor will be able himself to determine applications which are "strategic" (at present he can only direct a borough to refuse an application). The definition of strategic has been debated and negotiated over many months, and probably the most contentious issue is housing where the Mayor will be able to take over housing applications for more than 150 units, taking account of whether the borough is meeting its development plan targets including those for affordable housing - it is the shortage which underlies the changes.
The Liberal Democrats eventually, after consulting representatives of Lib Dem led councils, decided to support the Government against a Conservative attempt to increase the threshold to 500 units. 150 is after all itself pretty sizeable. This will not mean creating a homogeneous city; the boroughs will be able to keep their own character - but it does mean paying a lot of attention to what goes in their development plans.
The Government has moved a long way from its original proposals. Perhaps the greatest constraint on the Mayor will be that he cannot delegate these powers. The procedures will be similar to those at local level: agendas with officer recommendations published in advance, oral representations from the local authority and applicant (he can also hear objectors but is not required to - we lost that one), and he will have to sit through it all.
As a coda, I pushed to a vote a provision which would have postponed till after next May the restriction on anyone standing for Mayor or Assembly Member after serving two terms. I wanted to make it quite clear this was not a personal attack on the current Mayor (after all, we'd tried for this is 1999) and to change the rules so close to an election would be inappropriate. The Commons will throw out the two terms restriction, but as things stand, since they voted against this little amendment, it is the Government and the Labour party who have let a Bill proceed with a two-term restriction and no get out for Mr Livingstone.