UK Parliament / Open data

Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill

I was about to come to that point. The second objection mentioned in Committee was that the amendment implied that divergence is the only reason why a revaluation might or might not proceed, but that is not what we are saying. We are saying that divergence is one reason that must be dealt with in the debate, whether or not the Government think that it is their central reason. The third point concerned cost, which the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) mentioned. It was said in Committee that there would be a cost in officials’ time. However, the figures are generally available from the Land Registry and from the series maintained by the Halifax building society and by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. There would be no great cost in compiling the figures, but it would involve a good deal of effort from Ministers in constructing their reasons based on the information available to them. That is not an unreasonable burden for the political heads of Government Departments to bear in the interests of greater openness. I do not want to detain the House any further. The amendment is a proposed addition to the Bill from a party that is generally friendly to it. It would increase transparency and allow us to have a better debate, were these questions to arise again, than we have had on this occasion.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c469-70 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top