Member

There is a good reason why there are two amendments. They are there because Clause 18 amends more than one legislative approach by which mayoral powers can be created or adjusted. All Amendments 91 and 92 would do is ensure that the same common-sense safeguard applies against both approaches so that governance does not depend on which legal mechanism the Secretary of State happens to use at the time. I expect the Minister to say that this duty is unnecessary—I remain to be convinced—but, if that is the case, I gently suggest that the amendment should be unproblematic. If the Government are already doing this, placing this expectation in the Bill would simply reinforce good practice, provide reassurance to local government and help to future-proof the framework as devolved arrangements evolve. So why not make it explicit?