It would be the consequence of having a national revaluation in one big chunk. Amendment No. 3 would give the Government scope to carry out revaluation in bite-size chunks, which would mean that the VOA did not need to employ so many staff, as those working on a valuation in one year could move on to another one in the next year. That is what happened in Wales. Some of the VOA staff employed for the revaluation in Wales were redeployed to deal with the start of revaluation in England.
I am illustrating the consequence of the peaks and troughs in demand for VOA staff necessitated by a national revaluation. Those peaks and troughs could be ironed out if revaluation was in bite-size chunks. I am trying to illustrate the benefits of the amendment by drawing attention to the costs, which are on the public record—how much the Government have wasted by moving from what was to be a national revaluation to no valuation at all. They took on extra staff and are keeping many of them on, doing I know not what.
Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Christopher Chope
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 1 December 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c433 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:46:58 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282511
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282511
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282511