It is quite clear that the operation under clause 4(2) mirrors what TfL can do anyway under section 160 of the 1999 Act, and the scope of what a subsidiary can lawfully do by way of offering a guarantee or indemnity is not changed by this Bill whatsoever. From that perspective, the proposals to delete these references are almost irrelevant, given that the same powers exist under the 1999 Act. TfL is merely seeking to ensure that it has got this flexibility under those arrangements.
Transport for London Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Bob Blackman
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 April 2016.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Transport for London Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
608 c313 Session
2015-16Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2016-04-13 13:39:23 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-04-12/16041261000057
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-04-12/16041261000057
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-04-12/16041261000057