I will be brief as all that needed to be said on this issue has been said far more eloquently and succinctly by my noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding. He put his finger on the nub of the issue; the amendment, which may be a probing amendment, would introduce the potential for double charging the business rate supplement, levying up to 2p on the London business rates for Crossrail, and would allow local authorities—the boroughs—to initiate projects which could levy another 2p. I understand that if the amendment were accepted, similar dual charging possibilities could apply across the country wherever two-tier authorities exist. In places that may be close to our hearts at the moment, such as Lancashire, the county council could levy a charge and presumably a district council such as South Ribble could also levy a charge. This comes back to the point we have made throughout our discussion on the legislation; namely, that the Bill may have been conceived two years ago when the economic climate was completely different. It might have seemed a good idea then but this is about the worst possible time to introduce it. It has one purpose—to enable the development of Crossrail—and that should be the limit of its scope.
Business Rate Supplements Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bates
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 May 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Business Rate Supplements Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
710 c301GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:35:48 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555570
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555570
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555570