Only a few days to go: We’re raising £25,000 to keep TheyWorkForYou running and make sure people across the UK can hold their elected representatives to account.Donate to our crowdfunder
I have great respect for the hon. Gentleman, but he has not been listening to some of the previous arguments. The fact that all the major parties stood on the platform of supporting Crossrailfor exactly the reason that my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster gave, that everyone accepted that we were where we weredemonstrates that there was substantial buy-in among the voters. People could have voted for Respect, and I suspect that the UK Independence party and the British National party were also rather critical of Crossrail, but they did not, for obvious reasons.
We also had evidence from representatives of the London business community that in the circumstances, to kick-start Crossrail, London businesses were satisfied that the mechanism was one that they could live with. The fact that there are annual elections to the unitary authorities elsewhere in the country does not alter the argument. It is perfectly fine and helpful to have elections so that votersthe domestic council tax payerscan have their say on whether to have a council that continues with a BRS scheme. I do not have a problem with that, but that is no reason to say that non-domestic rate payersthose who contribute not through council tax, but through the BRSshould not have a ballot, so that they can have their say. The two are not mutually exclusive in any way.
If the Government conceded the principle that there should always be a ballot for a BRS scheme to be imposed, none of this argument would be necessary. The local authority could go forward, taking the domestic council tax payer vote with it in the elections in the ordinary way, but it would also be able to get buy-in from the business occupiers through a ballot. There would not be the potential conflict that the Governments scheme gives rise to.
In a rather larger nutshell than I had intendedalthough I hope I have enabled hon. Members, including Labour Members, to vent their viewsthose are the reasons why we proposed our amendments and have sympathy with those tabled by the hon. Member for North Cornwall. We certainly wish to see votes on such matters in due course. The other amendments in my name in the group are consequential, relating to the holding of a ballot in every case apart from Crossrail. I hope that that deals comprehensively with this group of amendments.