This is great news - less interfering from NIMBY's and their luddite views, less public inquiries and all the pointless expensive bureaucracy surrounding them, less delays and holdups for exciting world class projects, more real progress and development for London.
I'm not sure your anti democratic vision of a city with no planning regulation at all . Is how new labour intend there devolvment of power to an elected mayor to be seen.
Any development doesn't constitute progress.
Cart blanch to corporate interest wouldn't be in the public interest and a lap poodle to central government isn't what the people of London need.
If the mayor was representative of the people of London I would think giving him more power would be a good thing.
As it is im not even sure ken Livingston even likes London. Never mind being fit to run it.
However if giving the mayor more power produces a high calibre of candidate at the next mayoral election.
It may be for the good.
In the long run.
But if the calibre of candidate including non politicians doesn't turn up.
It sound like a recipe for disaster.
I think this is a real blow to democracy - BECAUSE Ken was so intent on being accepted back into the Labour party. I voted for him when he was INDEPENDENT, which is, I consider, the most important thing for the Mayor. But having Labour controlling London by the back door is outrageous. And phasing out the boroughs from decision making is also scary. Not that I hold SUCH a brief for Southwark Council, but having so much power in the hands of one man is unacceptable. Even if you subscribe to some of his views - power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.