I shall first come back to the noble Lord, Lord Borrie. The Bill provides that:"““The Secretary of State may give financial assistance to the Authority if he thinks that other sources of financial assistance will or may be insufficient for a purpose””."
My amendment proposes that the word should be ““shall”” rather than ““may”” and I still believe that. I do not believe that that gives any form of open hand to anybody because the Bill refers to,"““other sources of financial assistance [which] will or may be insufficient for a purpose””."
The amendment tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, relates to a cap. In another place, my party supported a cap and felt the need for one. As the noble Lord said, we need more clarity. We think that we know where the money is coming from. LOGOC has to raise £750 million and there are various other sources. However, it would be nice to be a bit clearer. It is also important that Londoners welcome these games. They are much more likely to welcome them if they know what the final cost to them will be. I strongly support the amendment tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, which provides for a cap.
London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Glentoran
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 31 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c95GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:59:33 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296531
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296531
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296531