Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bates (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 18 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Business Rate Supplements Bill.


Business Rate Supplements Bill

The amendment is fairly straightforward and I will not take a great deal of time in introducing it. I shall be grateful, however, to hear the Minister’s response. The amendment seeks to follow the theme of ensuring that businesses are kept involved in and apprised of how a scheme is going. Once they have committed and contributed to a scheme, they deserve to be kept informed to ensure that the project proceeds according to plan. This fits in with the point made during Second Reading about the contribution that businesses can make to major projects which extends way beyond their financial contribution. The knowledge and expertise involved in delivering projects on time and to budget is higher in the private sector than in the public sector, particularly under this Government. I do not want to impose any further disappointment or sadness—as has already been said, the Prime Minister is digging holes—but that has been observed. The key point is what happens once the money has been committed and approval has been given; how are businesses kept involved? The proposal in the amendment follows the recommendation made in the Lyons inquiry that businesses should have a strong voice in the final decision on the supplement and that that voice should be continuous throughout. By what mechanism can this achieved? In a business improvement district, for example, there are boards of directors, governance bodies, governing bodies and special purpose vehicles can be established, and representatives of the business community can be on them. I have alluded in previous debates to the City Challenge schemes which were introduced by the Conservative Government in the 1980s and 1990s. They were based very much on partnerships between the public and private sector and on the private sector having a real seat at the table when decisions were made. The amendment simply makes that point and seeks to put it in the Bill so that it cannot be avoided. It gives a structured role for business to oversee the use of funds and the delivery of projects; it draws on its expertise; and, as business will have made a contribution to a project, the amendment acknowledges its right to sit at the table to ensure that the promised benefits are delivered. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
710 c517-8GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Companies Ballots Administration Costs Business Corporation tax Elizabeth line Billing Greater London Information Greater London Authority Infrastructure Exemptions Leasehold Internet Local government Ownership Local government finance Ports Public consultation Rates and rating Property Business rates Partnerships Transport Small businesses Tax allowances Valuation Surcharges Tax collection Tenants Business improvement districts
Legislation
Business Rate Supplements Bill 2008-09
Non-domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2005
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk