The hon. Gentleman has to hang on for only a little bit longer, because we are nearly there. I will tell him exactly what we propose because the Treasury Committee suggested a simple way forward. It said that we should retain the current valuations until the next revaluation in 2010. That would be a sensible way forward because it would enable the revaluation process, which businesses accept should take place, and which they accept will increase some liability for them, to be done with proper consultation and assessments so that they could plan their cash flow and future business plans. That would be the sensible, rational, joined-up way to do it, and we as a party have urged the Government to do that. The debate gives them an opportunity to do so, even though we do not oppose the eight-year payment period of itself. [Interruption.] I must say that I am surprised that hon. Members are surprised about that—all they had to do was read the speech of my noble Friend Earl Attlee in the other place. It is in Hansard—he made it clear that we are not opposed in principle to the eight-year period. However, for the reasons that I hope I have set out as clearly as I can, that period is not adequate to relieve the dilemma in which businesses have been placed, first by the failures of the Valuation Office Agency, and secondly by the inadequacy of the Government's response.
This is the last chance for the Government to announce in this House that they will do the same thing for port businesses that they have done before for others. We will not vote against the regulations, but we have vented clearly our views about them as we regard them as very important. That would scarcely be a surprise to the Minister if he had read what we said in the House of Lords. I suspect that he might have done, actually, but we wanted him to be able to listen to the argument unfold in a chronological fashion.
The debate will also give the many Members of all parties who are concerned about the impact of the regulations in their constituencies the chance to tell the Minister directly what is happening. I am afraid that many people, businesses and Members feel that they are meeting a blank wall when talking to the Government.
Rating and Valuation (S.I., 2009, No. 204)
Proceeding contribution from
Robert Neill
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 April 2009.
It occurred during Legislative debate on Rating and Valuation (S.I., 2009, No. 204).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c990-1 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:41:48 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_545831
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_545831
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_545831