Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Andrews (Labour) 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

I am sorry. I gave a very abstract answer to that specific set of questions. My understanding is that the prospectus has to cover a number of different contingencies. It has to set out what would happen if things went awry in different ways, and I think that it would have to spell out how a major contributor going bust under those circumstances would be dealt with. Paragraph 23 of Schedule 1 says that there must be a contingency process for dealing with unforeseen circumstances. I think that we discussed refunds at one point, which is part of the notion of contingency. I sense that if things reached a critical stage, the prospectus might have to be revisited and varied in terms of the project. Therefore, those sorts of circumstances would certainly be covered. I hope that that is of more help to the noble Lord.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
710 c550GC 
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