Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill

---

[back to previous text]

The Chairman: Order. I hate to interrupt, but the hon. Gentleman is widening the debate a little further than is appropriate. I hope that he will bring his remarks to a speedy conclusion.

Mr. Wilshire: I was beginning to think that I was on thin ice. I will spare you the other 199 examples, Mr. Pike, but I used that one to demonstrate the dangers of the Minister's definition of regions as the artificial regional structure that is being imposed on us. Whatever example one uses, it is a one-size-fits-all exercise. My simple prediction is that, because of that, whatever the Government seek to achieve, whether it is social engineering or not, the exercise will fail—for which I am thankful.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

4 pm

Mr. Clifton-Brown: On a point of order, Mr. Pike. I am sorry to seek clarification on timetabling matters at this point, but I had originally been informed that we were to spend the first three sittings on part 1 and the next three sittings on part 2. There seems to be a discrepancy between the programme motion and the selection list on whether consideration of clauses 12 and 13 is to be concluded by the end of the third sitting. It appears that although clauses 12 and 13 are in part 2, they must be considered by the end of the third sitting. Would you please confirm whether that is the case, Mr. Pike?

The Chairman: Yes, they must be dealt with by 11.25 am, at which time the knife will fall. The selection list is wrong, whereas the programme motion as printed on the amendment paper is correct.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: Thank you, Mr. Pike. As a matter of tidiness and good order, I would have preferred each section of the Bill to be considered in different sittings. If we are to have knives, it seems a good general principle that we should not deal with a section of one part of the Bill during consideration of a different part of the Bill—it is untidy. However, as we cannot alter the terms of the programme motion, that is how it will have to be.

In passing, I point out that clauses 12 and 13 are very important. They deal with the powers of county councils and what is to be included in the local development plan.

Column Number: 066

The Chairman: Order. The hon. Gentleman is pushing me beyond my powers as Chairman. This morning, the Committee agreed the programme motion on the amendment paper, and I am bound by that procedure. If I as Chairman of this or any other Committee were to get an indication at any stage that a majority were in favour of a change to the programme motion and if I were to receive an indication from the Government that doing so was a realistic proposition, I would be prepared to suspend the sitting for a very short period to allow the Programming Sub-Committee to agree a new motion to put to the Committee. However, the proposition would have to be realistic.

The hon. Gentleman understands the situation as well as I do. If the Whips at any stage were to withdraw and then approach the Chair, the Chair would be reasonable. However, the Chair is bound by the decisions of the Committee and, indeed, of the House.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. That is a very helpful ruling. I suggest that we see how far we get in this sitting and, if necessary, the matter may be dealt with through the usual channels.

Mr. Wilshire: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. Your ruling is helpful. However, it is clear that we will not come close to dealing with clauses 12 and 13 between now and whatever time we finish this evening. We do not need to go outside the Room and have a chat about that. If it is of any help to the Government or if there has been some misunderstanding, I should say that I would be willing to engage in any conversation with anyone about the matter. I understand that the hon. Member for Ludlow is particularly exercised about it. The situation could easily have arisen from a misunderstanding of the words on a piece of paper rather than from the deliberate actions of anyone.

The Chairman: I hope that there is always reasonable liaison between the Whips. I shall be chairing Tuesday morning's as well as Tuesday afternoon's sitting and hope that we can make progress.

Members have asked me what time we will finish. Despite the Standing Orders for the House, the Committee could, in theory, sit right through the night if members of the Committee so wished. I am in the hands of the Committee and will accept a motion to make progress if the Government Whip so moves one. I will deem it reasonable to break for a meal if we go beyond a certain hour. I do not expect that to happen, but I am telling the Committee because several Members have asked me about it. The Chairman is not the one who decides when the sitting adjourns. Some Members are confusing what has changed by Standing Order with what has changed in the House. I hope that that clarifies the matter.

Mr. Wilshire: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. Even if we were to do as you suggest—sit until the early hours of the morning—we would still not get as far as clauses 12 and 13. I do not know whether you wish to contemplate being here on Saturday and

Column Number: 067

Sunday as Chairman, but I suspect that the other members of the Committee do not.

The Chairman: I served on many Committees when I was a member of the Opposition and the hon. Gentleman was in government, and we used to go on until the early hours of the morning. I hope that we will be sensible and reasonable today. We come now to clause 2.

Sir Sydney Chapman: On a point of order, Mr. Pike. My point of order is completely different from those just raised. I notice that you kindly selected my amendments Nos. 186, 188, 184 and 185 under clause 2. However, amendment No. 188 relates to clause 4, amendment No. 184 refers to clause 10 and amendment No. 185 relates to clause 11.

The Chairman: That is quite usual. Amendments to subsequent clauses are taken with the lead amendment where they deemed to be relevant to it. If, at the end of the debate, the hon. Gentleman indicates at the appropriate stage that he wishes to press the amendment to a vote, I will take note and call a Division. The amendment would have to be moved formally at that stage, but it will be debated in this group.

Sir Sydney Chapman: I am grateful.

Clause 2

Regional planning bodies

Mr. Clifton-Brown: I beg to move amendment No. 102, in

clause 2, page 2, line 8, leave out subsection (3).

The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 49, in

clause 2, page 2, line 8, leave out subsections (3), (4) and (5).

No. 5, in

clause 2, page 2, line 14, leave out 'may' and insert 'must'.

No. 50, in

clause 2, page 2, line 17, at end insert—

'(7) The Secretary of State may only give a direction once he has consulted all the authorities specified in section 4(2) as well as the Regional Development Agencies, Regional Chambers, Government Offices and members of the public. All representations must be made public prior to such a delegation being made.'.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: To refer to the points of order, we would have plenty of time to reach clauses 12 and 13 if we did not have the guillotine motion. Neither the Committee nor many outside organisations will appreciate our not reaching those clauses, especially since they relate to the transition of county councils. I want to register my protest that the Committee will not be doing its job if we cannot get to those clauses.

The clause to which the amendments relate is very important, as it is the clause under which the Secretary of State must designate the regional body. That is part of the transition from the current system of local plans and county structure plans to regional planning. I made it clear that the Opposition do not agree with regional planning or regional assemblies. However, the Government propose them and we must see whether they can work.

Column Number: 068

In my opening speech, I also made it clear that we could end up with an awful mishmash of planning in this country if we are not careful. If referendums are held and we vote for regional assemblies, some areas may have designated regional assemblies, some areas may have designated regional chambers while others have regional development agencies or government offices. The Government will have to consider the matter very carefully, because according to which body is designated, there will be a different emphasis on how it carries out its work. Some bodies will have directly elected members, while others have indirectly elected members. In the case of government offices, there will be no elected members at all.

Under the clause, once the Secretary of State has designated one of these designated bodies, if we may call them that, he can give a direction to withdraw recognition of that body if he does not like it. It would be draconian to withdraw recognition of that body having designated it, particularly if it is a regionally elected assembly. The amendments' purpose is to probe the Minister on the circumstances under which he would withdraw recognition.

Amendment No. 49 would omit subsections (3), (4) and (5). There is some sloppy drafting in subsections (4) and (5). On careful examination, those subsections are tautological because the opening words of subsection (4)—''Subsection (5) applies''—refer to subsection (5) before we even know what subsection (4) says. What a way to draft a Bill.

Subsection (4) should have started, ''If the Secretary of State'' and gone on to say what subsection (4) will do. It would then make sense for subsection (5) to begin:

''In such a case the Secretary of State may exercise such of the functions''.

The drafting is poor. As such, not only must we probe when the Secretary of State may give a direction. Subsections (4) and (5) are so badly drafted that they should be withdrawn at least until they can be corrected. They add further confusion to the entire process.

The direction given may recognise the regional assembly or the chamber as the RPB. Perhaps the Minister can clarify that point. In the kind and helpful guidance that he gave the Committee this morning, it says that in every case in which there was no elected regional assembly:

''although since the chamber is likely to be the RPB this seems unnecessary.''

That indicates that if the direction given does not recognise the elected regional assembly as the RPB it recognises the chamber. If that is the case, I would be grateful if the Minister would clarify that this afternoon. It is an important point, and I wish to know whether we have chambers up and running in every region. [Interruption.] The Minister is scowling. I can probably find the reference for him when I finish speaking because I hope that I have underlined it. It is on page 3 in the paragraph that starts clause 5.3. If I have misunderstood the document or it is incorrect, I would be grateful if the Minister could clarify the point in his reply.

Column Number: 069

 

---

Prepared 9 January 2003