I am interested to hear what the Minister has to say on this subject. He has raised some interesting questions. We are still not entirely clear on what liabilities commons associations might generate during their lifetime. Of course there could certainly be agri-environmental undertakings—I do not consider them to be liabilities—and I am not sure what would happen to such undertakings when the person undertaking them disappears. Obviously, if the liabilities and undertakings were to become too draconian, it is very unlikely that anyone would choose to set up a new commons association to take the place of the old one. This goes back to our earlier questions on whether some constraint should be placed on the way that debts are structured if they are engendered by a commons association.
In the light of the Minister’s remarks, we would like to take the amendment away and see whether we can bring it back in a revised form. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 35 agreed to.
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Duke of Montrose
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c239-40GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:39:20 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276005
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276005
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276005