My Lords, I was about to make the same speech. But as the Minister is likely to listen to a noble Lord who supports the coalition rather than to the Official Opposition, I will merely say that of course it can be seen from our amendment that we saw no reason why there should be a time constraint—a delaying element—built in. We very much agree with what the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, said about the impact of these amendments building an extra year of delay. But we are not quite clear on why there should be a restriction in Clause 37(8), which is why we have tabled an amendment for its deletion.
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Teverson. Of course, we will not get a perfect profile of the challenge which lies ahead. Governments never have perfect information on which to act, any more than anyone operating in the so-called market mechanism ever has perfect information on which to act. But we will have clear indicators of where the issues lie. We do not see why we should build into statute—certainly, not through an amendment—an extension to what the Government think is realistic and what can be achieved. I hope that the Minister will answer the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Teverson.
Energy Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 24 January 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Energy Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
724 c140GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 21:05:55 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704942
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704942
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704942