Budget Statement: Social Housing

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Thursday 21st December 2017 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

My Lords, on the first point the noble Lord made about empty properties, the Government have indeed been tackling that issue: in the last Budget we increased the powers for local authorities to charge more council tax for empty properties, which is an important move in that direction. However, I agree with the noble Lord about the importance of targets, and particularly about the record of Macmillan in the 1960s. As I say, the Government’s target would take us back to what seem like the halcyon days of 1970, when we were building far more houses than we are now.

[Lord Geddes (Con)]

Can my noble friend advise what steps the Government are taking to ensure that social houses, when built, are energy efficient?

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

My Lords, obviously there are building regulations that have to be complied with, which have been tightened in the past to ensure that they are greener—that is important. We have strict, ambitious and appropriate climate change goals following the COP 21 climate change conference in Paris some two years ago, which are very much part of the Government’s thinking—and again, I think that they have cross-party support from around the House, which is not always the case in other countries in Europe.

Energy Bill [HL]

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Monday 19th October 2015 Lords Chamber

Amendments 16 and 17 agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker (Lord Geddes) (Con)]

I should advise noble Lords that Amendment 18 has been placed incorrectly in the Marshalled List—it is an amendment to Clause 5.

Clause 5: Directions: national security and public interest

Amendment 18 not moved.

Energy Bill [HL]

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2015 Grand Committee

Amendment 13 not moved.

[The Deputy Chairman (Lord Geddes) (Con)]

My Lords, I am unable to call Amendments 14 to 22C since they were amendments to Amendment 13 which has not been moved.

Committee adjourned at 5.29 pm.

Fracking

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2015 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

My Lords, I am happy to give that guarantee. The noble Baroness will be aware that in relation to the north, a wealth asset fund will be created from any exploitation of shale gas, but any treatment will be totally equitable throughout the United Kingdom.

[Lord Geddes (Con)]

My Lords, not for the first time, I ask my noble friend: what are the prospects for tidal power?

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

My Lords, I am aware of my noble friend’s interest in that. He will be aware that the Swansea lagoon project has planning permission and there are many other promising tidal lagoon projects waiting in the wings. Tidal power is a matter to which the Government are giving close attention. It is a very exciting prospect.

Renewable Energy

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2015 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

My Lords, the noble Baroness will be aware that by 2025 electricity generation from unabated coal will represent only 1% of our generation.

[Lord Geddes (Con)]

My Lords, in the context of this Question, what is the Government’s policy on tidal power?

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

My Lords, my noble friend will be aware that the Swansea tidal lagoon has had planning permission, and we are now looking at the position of tidal power in relation to contracts for difference. It certainly represents an exciting possibility and one that has a lot of support—but I had better say no more than that as I made the planning decision.

Wales Bill

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Wednesday 15th October 2014 Lords Chamber

[Lord Rowlands]

My Lords, like many Members of this House, for a number of years I have had to read through Bills. In doing so, I eventually developed a habit that I cannot kick, namely that if I come to a clause or part of a clause that I cannot fully understand or appreciate and translate into the language of a lay man, I table amendments to delete those particular elements in the clause. I do this in the hope and the expectation that when Ministers reply they will tell me what it really means, and it will become crystal clear. I have to say that there have been occasions in the past when that has not happened, but I am sure that it will happen tonight and that we will have a clear view of what some parts of this clause are saying.

I must confess that I struggled with much of Clause 8. It is a very long clause; it rambles on for four and a half pages of the Bill. However, I was okay and I was getting there, until I hit new Section 116F on page 10. I was particularly intrigued by its subtitle, “Welsh taxpayers: Scottish parliamentarians”. I was intrigued to find out how this clause—presumably—seeks to define those Scottish parliamentarians who may end up paying Welsh income tax. I immediately seized the text to find out who these unfortunate—or fortunate—Scottish parliamentarians would be who could become liable to pay a Welsh income tax. I went through the text of new Section 116F from line 20 on page 10. We find in this new section that the Scottish parliamentarian is:

“An individual (T) who is a Scottish parliamentarian for the whole or any part of a tax year is a Welsh taxpayer for that tax year if—

(a) T is resident in the UK for income tax purposes for that year (see Schedule 45 to the Finance Act 2013),

(b) T meets condition C in section 116E for that year, and

(c) T meets either of the following conditions for that year.

(2) T meets the first condition if—

(a) the number of days in that year on which T is a member as described in any of paragraphs (a) to (c) of section 116E(4), exceeds

(b) the number of days in that year on which T is a Scottish parliamentarian.

(3) T meets the second condition if—

(a) the number of days in that year mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (2) are the same, and

(b) T meets condition A or B in section 116E for that year”.

I am sure now that every Member of the Committee who is here will know exactly who the Scottish parliamentarians are who are liable for tax.

I am quite good at the Times Codeword, but I have not decoded this particular new section at all. I immediately seized the opportunity to read the usually helpful Explanatory Note on this particular new section. It should be illuminating and answer all my queries. It states:

“Section 116F(1) sets out that if an individual has been a Scottish parliamentarian in a tax year, they will be a Welsh taxpayer if they are UK resident for the tax year, have also been a Welsh parliamentarian in that tax year and can meet one of the two conditions set out in the section. Taken with section 116E(5) this means that, if an individual is a Scottish parliamentarian for part of the year, but not a Welsh parliamentarian in that tax year, they will be a Scottish (rather than Welsh) taxpayer, even if, for example, they also have a close connection with Wales”.

Did I read that right? Are we talking about a Scottish parliamentarian who would be liable if he or she was also a Welsh parliamentarian in the same tax year? Who is this amazing creature? Who has this amazing electoral capacity to serve in one tax year both as a Welsh parliamentarian and a Scottish parliamentarian so that he or she would then be liable to pay tax in Wales? I find it difficult to envisage such a person ever existing. Everyone talks about belt-and-braces draftsmanship and this must surely be it. I would be grateful, when the Minister comes to reply, if he or she will tell me whether they know of anyone who is likely ever to be a Welsh parliamentarian and a Scottish parliamentarian in the same tax year so that we might then know which Scottish parliamentarian may be liable for Welsh income tax.

I use this as an illustration because I sometimes find that in this House—and I was a strong campaigner in the other House—I occasionally rebel against parliamentary draftsmanship of this kind. All these cross-references make it almost impossible to read. Even an intelligent person who is used to reading legislation should not be faced with drafting of this kind. It would be a good idea, once in a while, for the House to say to the Government, “Take this back, not because we do not agree with the intent but because it is drafted in such a way that it is almost incomprehensible”. If we started doing that, maybe we would have Bills better drafted than this one is.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Geddes) (Con)]

Having posed such a fascinating question, would the noble Lord like to move his amendment?

[Lord Rowlands]

I beg to move.

Wales: Silk Report

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Tuesday 21st January 2014 Grand Committee

[Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the opportunities for Wales resulting from the recommendations of Part One of the Silk Report.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Geddes) (Con)]

The Grand Committee is again adjourned for 10 minutes.

Sitting suspended for a Division in the House.

European Parliamentary Elections (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2013

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Tuesday 26th November 2013 Grand Committee

[Baroness Randerson]

I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate and I will do my very best to address the major points that have been made. The noble Lord, Lord Empey, referred to the concept—

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees]

With apologies to the Minister, a Division has been called in the Chamber. The Grand Committee stands adjourned until 4.55 pm.

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Wednesday 7th March 2012 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Howe of Idlicote]

My Lords, I wish to move the amendment so that I can make a brief statement on the subject.

[The Deputy Speaker (Lord Geddes)]

If the noble Baroness has started to speak to her amendment, she must move it.

[Baroness Howe of Idlicote]

What I wanted to say is that I am of course sad that this amendment cannot be debated tomorrow or on the next day of the Report stage because it is the sort of amendment that would have had the kind of support that was given to amendments taken earlier today. It has a modest aim to help those with a disability, those who have been in care, young people who are victims of trafficking and, above all, young people aged between 18 and 24. That group needs special help to get them through to adult life as more satisfied people in themselves and at less of a cost to the community. However, I accept that the usual channels have not arrived at such an agreement, so I apologise to the many groups who support this amendment—including the Children’s Commissioner for England. It is strange that one is not able to satisfy their desire as I would have wished by testing the opinion of the House, but I accept that now is not the time to do that.

I would like the opportunity to discuss this issue further with the Minister. He seems very happy to see people even though he is not that keen on giving assurances that things will change as a result, but I would still like that opportunity.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Having spoken to her amendment, does the noble Baroness wish to move it? That will give noble Lords a chance to reply.

[Baroness Howe of Idlicote]

Yes. I beg to move.

Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill

Lord Geddes Excerpts

Wednesday 19th January 2011 Lords Chamber

[Lord Thomas of Gresford]

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, referred to the winding-up speech of the Minister which took place more than an hour ago. Since that time we have had a further hour of debate. The abuse that started on Monday—organised by the party Whips, according to the documents that we have seen—is continuing. With great regret, I beg to move that the Question be now put.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Geddes)]

My Lords, I am instructed by order of the House to say that the Motion that the Question be now put is considered to be a most exceptional procedure and the House will not accept it save in circumstances where it is felt to be the only means of ensuring the proper conduct of the business of the House. Further, if a noble Lord who seeks to move it persists in his intention, the practice of the House is that the Question on the Motion is put without debate. I repeat, the Question is put without debate. I look to the noble Lord to see whether he wishes to persist.