I do not want this point to go unchallenged. I say to the noble Lord that I think the industry has heard absolutely correctly, but nobody I know in the industry believes that a Parliament can bind every future Parliament from thereon out and totally remove its democratic right. It would be inappropriate to attempt to do that and, frankly, I do not think it could be done, so it is absolutely crucial that we recognise that the Secretary of State can make a variance. It is not the intention of this Government that they will vary the RIS that they put forward, but I do not see that they can completely bind a future Parliament 100%. That is why the mechanism in place is to set a very transparent course—one could say an obstacle course—for any change or variance, so that it in no way would be done lightly. Perhaps no Government would do it lightly but it would be done with consultation and engagement, and with various steps in place. Industry has widely recognised that that provides it with a very substantial degree of certainty—enough to have the kind of positive responses to which the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin, referred.
Infrastructure Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Kramer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 3 July 2014.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Infrastructure Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
754 c366GC 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-10-12 15:54:09 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-03/14070377000046
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-03/14070377000046
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-03/14070377000046