Michael Gove (Shadow Minister (Housing), Communities and Local Government; Surrey Heath, Conservative)

The amendments relate to the provisions on the Mayor’s housing strategy. Inevitably, disentangling housing policy from planning policy is impossible. That is why they are grouped together in the ministerial portfolio. Inevitably, some of the points made in this debate may stray into territory also to be covered by the debate that I anticipate we will be having immediately afterwards. I hope, Mr. O’Hara, that you will forgive me if there is any straying from housing territory into planning.

It is striking that both we and the Liberal Democrats are anxious to remove the extension of the Mayor’s planning powers, because they will be extended at the boroughs’ expense. It is our united view on this side of the Committee that any growth in the Mayor’s powers should not take place at the boroughs’ expense.

The provisions are more complex in that respect and more open to debate, and we acknowledge that. They imply a devolution of power downwards to the Mayor. We accept that that could be a good thing in many respects, but we have certain concerns, which are embodied in the amendments. We hope that they precipitate a useful discussion and some clarification from the Minister. I hope that they also provide an opportunity for my hon. Friends and other hon. Members to raise their concerns about what is envisaged.

Our amendments would ensure that London’s housing policy was as devolutionary as possible and that that power was exercised at the lowest possible level. The amendments serve two functions: they welcome the idea that the Mayor should develop his own housing strategy and liberate him in one regard more than would the Government. The Bill places a series of constraints on the Mayor in the development  of his housing strategy that will allow his hands to be tied by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. One principle that we believe is important in devolution is that policy innovation should be allowed in different areas of the United Kingdom. We also believe that those responsible for shaping strategies or delivering policy should have the opportunity to do so in a way that conforms with the priorities of those they represent.

One of our concerns about housing policy—not just in London, but nationally—is that national targets and criteria, however well-intentioned their conception, have been applied in blanket fashion, causing housing policy that may have been conceived in a part of the United Kingdom for which it is appropriate to be applied in another part for which it is wholly inappropriate. For that reason, we want to allow the Mayor to become more of a pioneer and less of an agent of central Government in developing his strategy. I hope that those Labour Back Benchers who welcome the idea of giving the Mayor more powers, such as the hon. Members for Ealing, North, for Regent’s Park and Kensington, North and for Battersea, will look warmly on the liberating potential of our amendments.

See this speech in context