I am of course grateful for the questions on this matter, especially from the noble Lord, Lord Teverson. Perhaps later we will sit down and put our heads together. It could benefit all of us to read today's proceedings twice or three times to understand the different angles from which everyone has approached this. What I was referring to here, and perhaps did not explain clearly, is a situation where one tenant in a block of flats is holding out and the landlord does not go ahead because he does not have the full agreement of that tenant. I remember the point of the noble Lord, Lord Dixon-Smith, who asked: if there is no consent, where are we? The point of the amendment was to get over that hurdle and enable a local authority to step in if a landlord cannot carry on because one tenant refuses to make the improvements. However, at this time of the evening, and in view of all the debate that we have had, I suggest that we will all benefit from sitting down and thinking through where we are on the Bill. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 20AAA withdrawn.
Amendments 20AB and 21 not moved.
Clause 39 agreed.
Energy Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Grantchester
(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 c172GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 20:53:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_705025
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_705025
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_705025