He isn’t, in the sense @NJ_Timothy means. The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 (passed when @NJ_Timothy was assisting the then Home Secretary) makes it clear (s.4(3)) that it is the Commissioner who directs and controls the police.
The role of the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (s.3) is to secure the maintenance of the force, to ensure it is effective, and to hold the Commissioner to account.
Getting involved in planning the policing of a demonstration is not within the Mayor’s power.
As @ShaunBaileyUK is standing for that office, he should also note the point.
The EU has ratified the Protocol (it is part of the Withdrawal Agreement). The Protocol is not “very clear”* that it will be superseded: subject to the consent provisions, it is permanent.
The PD references alternative arrangements as something to be “considered”. Similarly, it also references mobility arrangements (which the current government turned down).
@MPIainDS voted for “the mess”, told us that detailed scrutiny of it was unnecessary, and urged us to vote for the party whose manifesto described it at a “great deal”.
Note again that there is a constitutional problem here. It isn’t surprising that ministers like a formula that disfavours inner city areas with deep needs when none of them represent such areas and the Tory party has no prospect of winning seats in such areas.
Governments that speak for, and have at the front of their minds, only certain areas of the country they serve is a real problem with first past the post.
Second problem: control of too much from the centre. If local government raised far more of its own money, with redistribution between them determined by a generally agreed formula, the centre wouldn’t be in a position to distribute favours in this way.
Similarly, devolution of budgets and power - which would lie at the heart of any genuine levelling up strategy - are not to be given more than occasional lip service.
I don’t say this lightly, but this extraordinary report by two independent government inspectorates into the way in which people were detained by the Home Office at Napier Barracks is a matter that calls for ministerial resignations. gov.uk/government/new…
“Fundamental failures of leadership and planning”.
More seriously, note that the claim that the UK will be pushing for such a deal is plausible enough: it’s in our interests. But that is - rather significantly - not the same as a claim that such a deal is remotely likely.
Even more seriously, the “UK leading the world” rhetoric is symptomatic of a failure to think seriously about the role a medium size power like the UK can actually play. Think broker, promoter of good ideas.
The first constitutional issue is the possible abuse of power to shovel funding to areas represented by Ministers and other Tory MPs. The delay in publishing the methodology increases suspicion that the methodology will be tweaked to generate the desired results.
Are our systems of accountability strong enough to detect and call out what everyone accepts in principle must be wrong - a distortion of public spending to areas which the government of the day feels are more politically sensitive at the expense of areas with greater need?