Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Goodman of Wycombe (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 June 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance Bill.


Finance Bill

This has been an interesting debate and it has formed itself around an observation by the hon. Member for Nottingham, South (Alan Simpson). He argued that what one does not report on, one is less likely to be held accountable for. What one is not held accountable for, one is not likely to have much of an incentive to improve. If the Treasury were to report once a year on the effectiveness of its microgeneration strategy, it would set out clearly how successful it expects the strategy to be; it would raise expectations and standards; the Treasury Committee would take great interest in it; and it would enable the Government to be held to account for what they are doing under these two clauses. The main amendments that we propose, amendments Nos. 34 and 36 are simple. They ask the Government to give an assessment not of their wider strategy, but simply of how successful they expect the clauses to be—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
462 c229 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Companies Agriculture Age Conservation Combined heat and power Annuities Buildings Capital allowances Housing Investment Energy Electricity generation Insurance companies Industry Grants Inheritance tax Personal income Pensions Property Pension funds Sales Small businesses Tax allowances Renewable energy Tax avoidance Taxation Technology Tax rates and bands Self-employed Solar power Carbon emissions Stamp duty land tax Alternatively secured pensions Managed service companies
Legislation
Finance Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk