The noble Baroness makes a good point, but that is not what the amendment says. It says only that the Secretary of State has to lay before Parliament a report as to the costs. It says nothing about repaying costs or additional costs because this and that has happened. It just says that the Secretary of State has to lay before Parliament a report as to the costs. That is all it is saying and that is all I am speaking to. The noble Baroness has indeed been making many other points, but I am trying to talk to this amendment.
As I was saying, I suggest that the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, picks up his telephone. In any event, these elections will, I believe, be no more onerous than the elections that Labour postponed until 2011. Any additional cost could have been avoided had the then Labour Government not forced their orders through against all their own rules and advice. Therefore, I find it a bit rich to cry now about costs that could and should have been avoided.
Local Government Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Cathcart
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 July 2010.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Local Government Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
720 c719-20 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 18:08:09 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_656006
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_656006
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_656006