Skip to main content

1-20 of 105 results for subject:Finance

Legislation X
London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill 2005-06
House X
House of Lords

Type

House

House of Lords (105)

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

More
London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill 2005-06 (105)

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Deposited by
Whips Office (Lords)
Type
Deposited papers
Date
7 February 2006
Reference
HDEP 2006/091
House
House of Lords

I hear what the noble Lord says, and he is right to say that the words do not have any legal significance. However, I shall reiterate the point I seek to emphasise here. The common understanding of the London Olympics will be the sporting events to be held in London. The Thirtieth Olympiad...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c66-7GC
House
House of Lords

I am grateful for the way in which noble Lords have spoken to their amendments. The thought crossed my mind at one moment that the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, and the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, could slug it out between the two of them about the power of the Mayor, and I could...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c105-6GC
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 21:"Page 3, line 7, after ““State”” insert ““and the Mayor of London””" The noble Baroness said: Clause 4(2)(b) permits the disposal of land at less than arm’s-length consideration with the consent of the Secretary of State. My amendment would also require the consent of the Mayor of London. The current...

Member
Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c102-3GC
House
House of Lords

My noble friend has made a compelling case for capping the liability of Londoners. I shall add a further matter for the Minister to deal with in his reply. In the bid documentation, the Government effectively state that in the relationship with the IOC they are the ultimate guarantor of the...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c95GC
House
House of Lords

I had hoped that my amendment, which seeks to replace ““may”” with ““shall””, would be accepted. But, in hope rather than expectation, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 13 to 18 not moved.] Schedule 1 agreed to. Clause 4 [General functions]: [Amendment No. 19 not moved.]

Member
Lord Glentoran (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c98GC
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 20:"Page 2, line 43, at end insert ““but the Authority may not take over the functions of any other authority unless specifically authorised to do so in this Act””" The noble Baroness said: Amendment No. 20 is the first in a large group comprising Amendments Nos. 26, 34, 46, 51, Clause 10 stand part and Clause 11 stand part. The...

Member
Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c98-9GC
House
House of Lords

So a UDA is almost in the position of a new towns commission, but not quite. That is exactly the position of this body. I appreciate the concept, but if the ODA is supposed to be a relatively tightly constrained body in terms of its size, we may be in deep...

Member
Lord Dixon-Smith (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c92GC
House
House of Lords

Perhaps I may add a brief point. I chair an urban regeneration company. This is the precise framework and wording to which we have to work in that environment. It is more, and different, and separate to just ““having an interest in”” the issue. Those of us with a local authority background...

Member
Baroness Billingham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c91-2GC
House
House of Lords

I may not have been as accurate in my commonsense as I sought to be. I understand the noble Baroness’s anxiety. The Committee is concerned about whether the degree of control will be exercised at such a level as to be absurdly burdensome and interfere with the effective operation of the ODA and,...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c88GC
House
House of Lords

I am sorry if I did not reply directly to Amendment No. 22, which concerns the question of consent before the ODA supplies funding to any other body to carry out work in connection with Olympic purposes. We want the ODA to have the flexibility to make financial arrangements, and of course it...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c87GC
House
House of Lords

I will take advantage of the kindness of the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, in responding on the amendments that I moved before she winds up on the group as a whole. I am very familiar with the reluctance of government draftsmen and Ministers to include long lists. I tell the noble Lord, Lord Smith of Finsbury,...

Member
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c117-8GC
House
House of Lords

I am sorry to intervene again but I am becoming increasingly puzzled. Given all the work the Mayor has done to find the site and attract the Olympics to London, while the Minister may have a more vivid imagination than I, I cannot conceive of a planning application for the Olympic site that...

Member
Lord Dixon-Smith (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c108GC
House
House of Lords

Perhaps I may add a point to the question here. If the specified case is one where the application is contrary to the spatial development strategy, the London Plan, does the plan remain a material consideration in taking the planning decision? I am sorry; perhaps I may put that a little more clearly....

Member
Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c108GC
House
House of Lords

It is unbelievable that a planning application for the major arena, the great central stadium which will be the core of the whole operation, could arrive at the planning application stage without every member of the Olympic Delivery Authority being involved in discussions on its designs, specifications and so on....

Member
Lord Dixon-Smith (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c90GC
House
House of Lords

We are all agreed on the objectives. The noble Baroness indicated, and the noble Lord supports, that the intention behind the subsection is to create a Chinese wall between the people in the ODA who will be drawing up applications for planning permission and those people who will be taking decisions...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c90GC
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 11:"Page 34, line 20, leave out ““is involved”” and insert ““has an interest””" The noble Baroness said: I make it absolutely clear from the outset that this is a probing amendment. Amendment No. 11 seeks to amend the schedule. Paragraph 20 states:"““A member or employee of the Authority who is involved in—" I seek to understand...

Member
Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c89-90GC
House
House of Lords

I am grateful to the noble Lord, as I fear I was going to make not nearly so well informed points as he has done. I was trying to understand how the matter would get into the public domain, which I consider it needs to do. I conclude by saying that if I were a member of...

Member
Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c89GC
House
House of Lords

The noble Lord, Lord Borrie, has put his finger on the point here. Much of the deliberation of the ODA will involve land. Therefore what we are really seeking is a two-tier system. At the outset some people will be designated to deal with planning, while another group on the board...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c91GC
House
House of Lords

I hear what the noble Lord says. We do not want to arrive at that situation, which would be absurd. ““Interest”” will be clearly defined in terms of an interest in the land. With ““involvement””we are trying to create a clear separation between the group of people who involve themselves in...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
31 January 2006
Reference
678 c90-1GC
House
House of Lords