Business Rate Supplements Bill

It has been an interesting debate. Both noble Lords who spoke raised interesting questions. I wrote down the noble Baroness’s phrase "commanding support"—that the project has to command support. I wrote down "ballot"; we are going to keep coming back to that, are we not? It is certainly necessary for the levying authority to demonstrate how the project will contribute to economic development. It has to win the argument before it wins a vote, of course. The noble Earl’s question was really interesting. In a big area or one that is diverse, that question will cause a lot of heart-searching; it already has in London. On housing, the Minister referred to the range of bodies that have statutory duties, but I am not sure that that is an answer to the question. We know that those duties are not adequately delivering, and we know about the interchange. I do not disagree with her about health services, education and so on, but the lack of housing is a problem within economic development issues. She distinguishes the power that local authorities have from a duty in the area of economic development; I think that is what it really comes down to. I thought yesterday, but forgot when I came in this morning, that I should have a look at the Regional Development Agencies Act, because my recollection is that RDAs have a limited opportunity to provide housing to support their projects. Has that provoked anybody? If it is the case, as I am pretty certain it is, it would at least support an argument for a limited power to provide housing. I shall certainly pursue that. I do not think that we have exhausted the area, but I beg leave to withdraw Amendment 2. Amendment 2 withdrawn. Clause 1 agreed.