Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Richard Caborn (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on London Olympics Bill 2005-06.


London Olympics Bill

Clause 4(5) ensures that everyone whose land is injuriously affected by Olympic construction works will be entitled to a fair amount of compensation. That provision will apply to businesses in the same way as it applies to home owners. Compensation will be calculated on the basis of depreciation in the market value of the land affected. In the event of dispute, there will be a right of appeal to the Lands Tribunal. That puts the Olympic project on exactly the same footing as other major construction projects undertaken by public bodies. The Olympic delivery authority will pay compensation, rather than the London Development Agency, as it will be directing the works on the LDA’s land. The responsibility will go to the ODA when this Bill, I hope, becomes an Act. Under an earlier amendment, all the work and contracts operated by the LDA will go to the ODA—I hope in an efficient and effective way. In adopting that approach, the Bill is entirely consistent with the precedent set in other contexts, including the channel tunnel rail link project. I understand where the hon. Member for Croydon, South (Richard Ottaway) is coming from. He is concerned to make sure that businesses get a fair deal, and I support that aim. We also want to ensure that people are fairly compensated. We do not want to make the Olympics a special case, however, compared with other large-scale public construction projects. The amendment would create a special case by widening the class of people entitled to compensation to cover all those whose interests are affected, however indirectly and regardless of whether they are land owners or tenants in the land affected. That is too broad an approach. Its effects are uncertain, but it is likely to result in a multiplicity of claims and to prove very expensive. It is much better to rely on several decades of case law in this area to provide what is acknowledged to be a fair and reasonable compensation scheme for those who deserve compensation. We have provided the necessary hook in the Bill to ensure that that is the case.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c796-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disability Compensation Compulsory purchase Betting Advertising Costs Business Council tax Contracts for services Finance Land Greater London Greater London Authority Infrastructure Facilities Local government Property transfer Planning Olympic Games National Lottery Location Paralympic Games Sales Regional planning and development Sports Touting Transport for London Tickets Regional development agencies London Development Agency London 2012 Organising Committee Olympic Delivery Authority
Legislation
London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk