Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Andrews (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Business Rate Supplements Bill.


Business Rate Supplements Bill

Local authorities and business together will have to show in their partnership document, the prospectus, what they anticipate the total cost of the project will be. If it becomes clear at some stage that the cost has been underestimated or overestimated, they will have to have a way of dealing with those contingencies that is expressed in the original prospectus. They will have to show that they have anticipated some contingency if things do not work out quite as expected. The noble Earl asked about refunds. I am afraid that I do not have an answer, and I suspect that we will not find one in the Bill or the guidance, but I will write to noble Lords with a little more detail. On the ballot, if it turns out that there has been a gross misrepresentation—an underestimate or whatever—the prospectus would have to be re-presented, and there may have to be arrangements for a ballot at some point. I am not entirely certain that I have got that precisely right, but I will write to the noble Earl.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
710 c289GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Business Housing Greater London Discounts Economic growth Local government Local government finance Public consultation Business rates Regional planning and development Business improvement districts
Legislation
Business Rate Supplements Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk