Proceeding contribution from James Brokenshire (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Companies Bill (HL).

Companies Bill [Lords]

I think the point made in Committee was that the term ““political expenditure”” could be construed more widely, beyond the narrow confines of an election campaign. Something that was supportive to either an Opposition or a Government could be captured by the definition. I do not think that the Bill is as restrictive as the hon. Gentleman suggests. I fear that the approach adopted in new clause 76 would be more regulatory and bureaucratic, and would not achieve the greater transparency that he wants.

Secondary information

Type: Proceeding contribution
Reference: 450 c966
Session: 2005-06
Chamber / Committee: House of Commons chamber
Subjects: Access Disclosure of information Animal welfare Accountability Company law Community development Companies Directors Business Annual reports Liability Donors Expenditure Exemptions Harassment Ethics Journalism Personal records Membership Political parties Public companies Loans Staff Meetings Private companies Lobbying Registration Trade unions Voting rights Shareholders Huntingdon Life Sciences Business plans
Legislation: Companies Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link: View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk

Companies Bill [Lords]

Secondary information

Librarians' tools