|
Mr. Clifton-Brown: On a point of order, Mr. Amess. I have studied the Bill in considerable detail. It contains 22 order-making powers for the Secretary of State. To my knowledge, we have not yet seen the draft of any of those powers. I ask the Minister, in a non-partisan spirit, if we can see drafts of those powers as soon as possible for the good housekeeping of the
Column Number: 011
Committee and so that we can consider the Bill properly in context and, if necessary, table appropriate amendments in good time, so that they are not starred when we come to the appropriate section of the Bill.
The Chairman: That is not a point of order for me, but it is on the record and I am sure that the Minister heard it.
Question put:—
The Committee divided: Ayes 8, Noes 3.
Division No. 1]
AYES
Edwards, Mr. Huw
Francis, Dr. Hywel
Green, Matthew
Levitt, Mr. Tom
McNulty, Mr. Tony
Norris, Dan
Roche, Mrs. Barbara
Wright, David
NOES
Chapman, Sir Sydney
Clifton-Brown, Mr. Geoffrey
Wilshire, Mr. David
Question accordingly agreed to.
Resolved,
That—
(1) during proceedings on the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill the Standing Committee do meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays at five minutes to Nine o'clock and at half-past Two o'clock;
(2) 12 sittings in all shall be allotted to the consideration of the Bill by the Committee;
(3) the proceedings to be taken on the sittings shall be as shown in the second column of the Table below and shall be taken in the order so shown;
(4) the proceedings which under paragraph (3) are to be taken on any sitting shall (and so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the time specified in the third column of the Table;
(5) paragraph (3) does not prevent proceedings being taken (in the order shown in the second column of the Table) at any earlier sitting than that provided for under paragraph (3) if previous proceedings have already been concluded.
| TABLE
|
|
Sitting | Proceedings
|
Time for
conclusion of
proceedings
|
|
1st
|
Part 1, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 1, Clauses 12 and 13
|
—
|
|
2nd
|
Part 1, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 1, Clauses 12 and 13
|
—
|
|
3rd
|
Part 1, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 1, Clauses 12 and 13 (so far as not previously concluded)
|
11.25 am
|
|
4th
|
Clauses 14 to 36
|
—
|
|
5th
|
Clauses 14 to 36
|
—
|
|
6th
|
Clauses 14 to 36 (so far as not previously concluded), New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 2
|
5 pm
|
|
7th
|
Clauses 37 to 39, Schedule 1, Clauses 40 to 49, Schedule 2, Clauses 50 to 53
|
—
|
|
8th
|
Clauses 37 to 39, Schedule 1, Clauses 40 to 49, Schedule 2, Clauses 50 to 53
|
—
|
|
9th
|
Clauses 37 to 39, Schedule 1, Clauses 40 to 49, Schedule 2, Part 5 (so far as not previously concluded), New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 5
|
11.25 am
|
|
10th
|
Part 6, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 6
|
5 pm
|
|
11th
|
Part 7, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 7, Clauses 78 to 83, Schedules 3 and 4, Clause 84, Schedule 5, Clause 85, Schedule 6, Clauses 86 to 90
|
—
|
|
12th
|
Part 7, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 7, Clauses 78 to 83, Schedules 3 and 4, Clause 84, Schedule 5, Clause 85, Schedule 6, Clauses 86 to 90 (so far as not previously concluded), remaining New Clauses and New Schedules and any remaining proceedings on the Bill
|
5 pm |
The Chairman: I shall make a few preliminary announcements before we start to examine the Bill. I am not sure whether we shall always play to a packed audience, but we could investigate the possibility of obtaining a slightly larger Room.
The point made by Mr. Clifton-Brown about the early start is not a matter for me, but no doubt it has been heard by the appropriate channels.
Sir Sydney Chapman asked about afternoon sittings and it is correct that they are open-ended, so, in theory, we could sit until 1 am the next day.
I remind the Committee that there is a money resolution in connection with the Bill and copies are available in this Room.
I also remind hon. Members that adequate notice should be given of amendments. As a rule, my co-Chairman and I do not intend to call starred amendments, including any that may be reached during an afternoon sitting.
Mr. Speaker has asked that members of all Committee be reminded to switch off their mobile phones.
Some hon. Members have asked about taking off their jackets. I am surprised that anyone would wish to do so in this inclement weather, but hon. Members may feel free to remove any article of clothing within reason.
Mr. Wilshire: On a point of order, Mr. Amess. You referred to afternoon sittings. I understand that one of the reasons for the change of hours in the House was to make it easier for hon. Members to get away from this place. On Thursdays the House rises early and will rise at 6 o'clock today. Have the Government indicated whether we shall sit beyond that time? My assumption at the moment is that we shall not. The Opposition would be happy to do so, but some colleagues must catch trains, aeroplanes and so on and if you have any indication that we may sit later, perhaps you would share the information with the Opposition so that we can make the necessary arrangements to be here late.
The Chairman: That is not a point of order for me, but it has been heard and I am sure that there would be discussion through the usual channels. Clause 1
Regional Spatial Strategy
Mr. Clifton-Brown: I beg to move amendment No.71, in
clause 1, page 1, line 4, at end insert—
Column Number: 013
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
New clause 2—Strategic Environmental Assessment—
'.—All plans must be subject to a Strategic Environmental Assessment.'.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: Before getting to the meat of the amendment, I should make a declaration of interest. As stated in the Register of Members' Interests, I am a fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and I have property interests. Sadly, I do not think that they will be enhanced by the Bill, but one never knows whether they might be in future.
I pay tribute to the Council for the Protection of Rural England which suggested the amendment. It is a key amendment because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet said, the Bill places great importance on the new concept of the regional spatial strategy. The concept of a spatial strategy is not new—it means all the development that is going on around us—but it is certainly new on a regional basis. We will examine later the procedures for drawing up those spatial strategies, which bodies will do so and which body is to be nominated, but under clause 1 we consider what they will contain.
9.30 am
Surprisingly enough, considering the importance of the matter and the huge detail that the Bill goes into, the detail of what is to be in the regional spatial strategies is pretty thin. It is a missed opportunity. Clearly in this increasingly litigious age, it is likely that they will at some stage end up in our domestic courts or the European courts. The judges will have to make a judgment about what is supposed to be in them. The courts are reluctant to over-rule any decision that is set out clearly in a Bill of a domestic Parliament. That is particularly true of the European court. Therefore it is desirable—
The Chairman: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but he should direct his remarks specifically to the strategic environmental assessment. If he continues to discuss these matters on a broad basis, my co-Chairman and I might not be minded to have a stand part debate.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: I was coming precisely to the point, Mr. Amess, which you have pulled me up upon. We have to put the matter in context and explain why the amendment is necessary. We want sustainable development frameworks and strategic environmental assessments to be included but the Bill does not go into sufficient detail. The regional spatial strategies will need to include sustainability and economic matters.
European directives require that the environment be considered in drawing up those plans, particularly on larger developments. I agree on the whole with my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) that a Government should not interfere with an individual's right to do what he wishes with his property. The problem is that one person's development can be another person's deficit, so a
Column Number: 014
planning system and a regional spatial strategy are needed.
In respect of the regional spatial strategy, there is huge concentration in the powers not only of the region, but of the Secretary of State. Under clause 9(3) he can draw up the spatial strategy himself and revoke it at any time under clause 9(5). We need a system whereby we can be certain about what that spatial strategy should contain. The Opposition believe that it should contain a number of things, one of which is the strategic environmental assessment. After all, if one has not made an environmental assessment of the area, how can one come up with a sensible spatial strategy? It simply is not possible. One has to consider the environment. One has to consider sustainability and economic matters. Those are all important matters that need to be considered. There is no way that a spatial strategy could be drawn up without them. We believe, therefore, that they should be included in the Bill. That is why we have tabled amendment No. 71.
I will give specific examples of why an environmental strategy is needed within the regional spatial strategy. My hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne mentioned the example of terminal 5. I know that we will discuss major infrastructure projects later in the debate, but a large-scale development such as that will affect a huge number of people's lives, and for that reason alone the environment must be considered.
People's lives will be affected by many aspects of such a huge development: noise, fumes, traffic and transport. Many issues affect planning decisions, and that is why we believe that there should be an environmental assessment. The Government will have some explaining to do if they resist the amendment. The Secretary of State has huge powers to direct what is in the spatial strategy. If, despite those powers, he still resists the amendment, there is something wrong with the system.
The development of a port has a huge environmental impact. One of the first Committees on which I served in this place considered the Cardiff Bay Barrage Bill in 1992. That was a highly controversial development. In those days there were no environmental assessments, and that project had a huge effect on the environment. I have been to that area since then. Had I known then what I know now about how the environment would be affected and how the finished product would end up, I would have voted for the Bill with alacrity. The whole area has been improved: development has taken place, the environment has been considered and, in many ways, enhanced by good planning. That is precisely our aim in the Committee, and it is the objective at the heart of the Bill—the regional spatial strategy.
We can all discuss the mechanisms to implement planning, but it is the content of the plans and strategies that is important. That is why we must consider the environment.
I urge the Minister to consider whether it would be possible to include such an amendment. However, even if the amendment is rejected here, part of our function is to flag up such issues for another place, so
Column Number: 015
that we may return to the discussion, and eventually improve the Bill by including in it this amendment or something similar.
|
