The purpose of this amendment is to find out why the Government are determined that IFCAs will not have powers to borrow money. They will of course be financed primarily by the local authorities involved but, given that a local authority may well have given an indication of the size of precept that it is going to make to an IFCA in any one year so that it can budget, it is not unreasonable that an IFCA should be allowed to borrow money to pursue something that it knows it will need to do—for example, buy a new patrol boat. It might want to buy something in advance that would have to be financed over two or three years. By denying IFCAs the right to borrow money against a certain amount that they know they will get from the local authorities, the Government seem to be denying them the freedom to use their resources as best they can. In moving this amendment, I am seeking to find out what on earth the Government’s thinking is here. I beg to move.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 16 March 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c87 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:12:29 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_538765
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_538765
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_538765