§ 47 Clause 19, page 34, line 18, leave out 'Act' and insert Tart'.
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 47. At the same time I shall speak to Amendments Nos. 51 to 75 en bloc. These amendments simply tidy up the minor definitions and index of defined terms in Clause 20. They do not make substantive changes to any of the definitions.
§ Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in the said amendment. —(Lord Trefgarne).
§ Lord PestonMy Lords, I have a simple query which I think may be answered in a very straightforward way in reference to the definitions. Am I to understand that these are not changes in definitions in any way that is significant? However am I also to understand that where these definitions appear, they are all definitions that are known to and fully accepted by the accounting profession?
I ask the question because as an economist most of them seem fairly nonsensical in economics terms. I never expect economics and accounting to coincide; but it would be of some interest to me at least to be assured that the accounting profession has been fully consulted and that in its view the definitions make sense even though, as an economist, I could have a great deal of fun exposing their meaninglessness.
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, I am happy to confirm for the noble Lord that these amendments are fully understood by the relevant experts.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.