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
I do not share the noble Earl’s view that that is likely. Frankly, it is not in anyone’s interests to come forward with a fraudulent prospectus, which is what it would be. The prospectus will have to be tested against outcomes, criteria and hard questions of project management. The funding elements of that will have to be specific and evidenced. With the best will in the world, projects change—there might be cost overruns, for example—and the reason why we say that the prospectus has to spell out how underspends or overspends will be dealt with is precisely that that discipline must be there for the partners to be able to deal with such an situation.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 710 c331-2GC
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:23:09 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555622
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555622
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555622