| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ms Hilary Armstrong (North-West Durham): We are quite happy to accept the amendments, which demonstrate the problems encountered in making legislation. The Bill was originally introduced because a valuation panel had, in essence, changed people's understanding of the existing law, which we were trying to put right. Apparently, we did not manage to do that during the Bill's earlier passage through the House, but that problem has now been corrected. I certainly agree with the Government's intention in the amendments, and I shall not oppose them.
I thank the Minister for his words of reassurance to the Residential Boatowners Association. Members of that organisation clearly have been working on the issue for
some time, and I am pleased that they have received some reassurance. It is important that groups such as that one--composed of people who live a different life style but who, none the less, have rights and responsibilities, as do the rest of us--feel that they are being fairly treated and properly consulted. Those people are looking basically for a rating system that is fair and simple to administer, as are we all. I think that we are accomplishing that aim, but the Bill's passage shows how difficult that is to achieve.
Many boat residents feel that they are being unfairly treated, and that there are too many grey areas resulting in constant disputes that waste the time and resources of everyone involved. As the Minister said, boat residents are particularly concerned about some aspects of council tax legislation. Their concern has arisen because of how they are treated by changes in council tax legislation in comparison with how they were treated under the general rates, which was, of course, before the poll tax.
Many boat residents who previously had no rates liability contend that that they now have to pay council tax in addition to licence and mooring fees, which previously were how they paid a share of local rates. Boat residents have substantial concerns, and it is right for the Government to deal with their concerns in a way that enables them to feel that they are properly involved in consultations.
Any legislation on rating and valuation ends up being far more complex than any hon. Member would like it to be. I hope that we are able to move to a clearer system so that there are not continual wrangles and conflicts over a matter in which everyone has a responsibility to make his contribution. People also have a right not to be treated unfairly. I am happy to reassure the Minister that we do not wish to press our concerns any further.
Question put and agreed to.
Lords amendment No. 1 agreed to [Special Entry.]
Lords amendments Nos. 2 and 3 agreed to.
As amended (in the Select Committee and on re-committal in the Standing Committee), considered.
Ordered,
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Geoffrey Lofthouse):
With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following: Government new clause 5--Related works: application of section 9 of the Transport and Works Act 1992.
Government amendments Nos. 1, 2, 9 and 10.
The Question is--[Interruption.] I am sorry. I callMr. Tony Banks.
Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West):
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We are moving so fast that I almost missed the train. I thank the Secretary of State for tabling the new clauses and amendments. When I proposed in Committee that Stratford should be named in the Bill, some of my colleagues tried to dissuade me from doing so on the ground that I would be defeated. When I explained that the amendment was exploratory and that we wished simply to go over the case, they seemed more satisfied. Even I did not expect that we would move to this particular position and I am deeply grateful to the Minister for having given an assurance at the end of a constructive debate that he would consider including Stratford within the Bill, and that he has done precisely that.
For the record, the campaign to name Stratford in the Bill and, indeed, to have the international station at Stratford, was waged--or I should say conducted; waged is too hostile and macho--by both the public and the private sector in the east end. During the campaign, we invited virtually all the Transport and Environment Ministers to the area so that they could see the site. I well remember the Minister standing at Holden point, a tower block which overlooks the Stratford railway lands, when it was pouring with rain. We were well protected and he was not, and I was worried that he might hold it against
us, but he did not. He--and, I am sure, others--was impressed by the scale of the potential in Stratford. One has to see the area to realise the scale of the potential. I am glad that the Under-Secretary will also be visiting. We look forward to letting him see what is possible at Stratford.
The campaign for Stratford was a good campaign. We worked together. It was necessary for us to argue coolly and rationally. There was not much point getting hot under the collar, which is perhaps one of my normal styles of doing things. When needs must, I can sup with the devil, although I always remember my long spoon and my manners, and the coolness with which I can maintain a good case. In the end, it was not the activities of Members of Parliament or the council which achieved success. It was simply a good case. It was good to see that Ministers were able to recognise that.
I am grateful to the Minister for tabling the new clauses and amendments. They have given enormous encouragement to the locality. I should just point out--this is really for another time--that we must make sure that when, as we can say now, the development goes ahead, the jobs that come to the east end and particularly the Stratford area match the needs of the people in the area. We do not want to see another Isle of Dogs, where the local people realised that they would not get the jobs. They suffered the conditions, but they did not get the benefits. We must make sure that the local people get the benefits because they deserve a break.
The international station at Stratford will be more than just a break. It will be a wonderful opportunity to look forward to the future with great confidence. So, again, I say thank you very much to Ministers present and past who took the time and trouble to come to Stratford, to hear our case and to listen to the lobbying from the public and private sector in the east end.
Mr. Stephen Timms (Newham, North-East):
I agree with everything that my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) has said. I welcome the steps that the Government have taken in introducing the new clause and amendments. It is worth putting on the record the strong support by the private sector for the campaign in favour of Stratford station. The Stratford development partnership comprised organisations such as Land Securities, Tarmac Construction, John Mowlem and Company, P and O Developments and Laing Civil Engineering as well as the London borough of Newham, the university of East London, the Carpenters' Company and the London Docklands development corporation. All those bodies worked together effectively with politicians to advance the case. I, too, am delighted that the Government have accepted it. Just last week,the university of East London published with Lawrence and Wishart a book called "Rising in the East", which
That on consideration of the Bill, as amended, the New Clauses be considered in the following order, namely, New Clauses 4 to 7 and New Clauses 1 to 3.--[Mr. Streeter.]
'.--(1) The Secretary of State may make payments under any agreement entered into by him for the purpose of securing the construction of--
(a) any of the works authorised by this Part of this Act, or
(b) any related works.
(2) For the purposes of this section, the following are related works--
(a) a station at Stratford, in the London Borough of Newham, for use in connection with the rail link, and
(b) a railway providing access between the rail link and the West Coast Main Line by means of a connection to the North London Line.'.--[Mr. Watts.]
Brought up, and read the First time.4.40 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |