The hon. Gentleman says that that will always be the case, but if he were to read the 1992 Act and, more importantly, the Hansard report of the debates on that legislation, he would understand that an essential part of resource equalisation—the notional effort made by banding to equalise the system—would not be possible, so the amendment would throw out the baby with the bathwater. There would thus be a confused situation with different banding systems operating in different billing authorities. If the hon. Gentleman stays with my argument, he will understand the position.
Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Phil Woolas
(Labour)
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 c464 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:46:19 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282642
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282642
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282642