Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill

My Lords, I am grateful for that intervention and will address that point in what I have to say. I am coming to the broader politics now. To finish my thought on the link between having gone ahead with revaluation and the way it would have fed into the Lyons report, as originally conceived—as strictly about local government finance—it would have informed that procedure, and there would have been that link. When his remit was extended, in our statement on 20 September on the way forward we emphasised that there was a need to postpone revaluation to give time for his recommendations to be properly considered, consulted on, and for a properly developed package of reforms to be brought forward with a date for revaluation. In a shorthand way, that explains what we think will happen. The remit was extended for good reason. As Sir Michael recognised and explained in his interim report, there have been such a lot of changes in structure and organisation, not least the financial arrangements for local authorities’ three-year budgets and so on, that it was logical to extend the remit. Having done so, it made perfect sense to postpone revaluation so that it can be informed. We cannot predict what Sir Michael Lyons will come forward with. It will happen at the end of the year and may well involve primary legislation. We cannot possibly know that at this point. But, whatever happens, it will precede an open debate on revaluation and the implication of what he comes forward with. Running alongside that—he is looking at local government functions, as the noble Baroness knows—we are conducting a much wider debate on local government as a whole and the whole set of relationships, not least with neighbourhoods. We will bring forward a White Paper in July, which will be part of this wider debate, into which Sir Michael will feed his own thoughts, obviously reflecting on where he has reached with his deliberations. But the two processes will go side by side. I am absolutely confident that it will be an open process. The noble Baroness has expressed concerns about the nature of the debate. It will be addressed by debates not only with all partners in local government but in this House and in the other place, alongside what we intend to do. I conclude with one final important matter. I believe that because of the nature of the amendment the noble Baroness should be reluctant to return this to the other House in this way. She is a very credible politician. I hope that the arguments I have brought forward, which have been across the spectrum, will have convinced her and that she will feel we have had a good debate on the Bill, as I would have intended. But I believe that the amendment is unworkable and unnecessary and I hope very sincerely that she will agree with me on that point.