Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill

---

[back to previous text]

Mr. Wilshire: I am grateful to the Minister: at long last, we seem to be making a little progress. Two offers to reconsider on one group of amendments is a joy that I had not expected to come my way. It perhaps grieves me slightly that his first offer—he clearly said that he would come back and do something on Report—related to an amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Ludlow. It is perhaps my misfortune that I achieve my greatest successes when using someone else's amendment, but I believe in learning new tricks from all sorts of people.

I suppose that, having moved a Liberal amendment, I should now rush out and issue press releases, taking the credit not only for moving it so eloquently and persuading the Minister but for picking it up in the first place. The hon. Gentleman would surely have done that to me in true Liberal Democrat fashion had the roles been reversed—[Interruption.] It is always the case that Government and Conservative Members squabble about many things, but as soon as there is a chance to beat the Liberal party over the head, there is support on both sides of the Committee. At least I have got one thing right in the course of these proceedings.

I am also grateful to the Minister in another respect. I may put more words into his mouth than he would wish, but I think that I heard a little movement towards the idea of timetables. He might not like to call them that, but let us be thankful for small mercies. I welcome what he said, and I do not want to spoil the offer by being churlish about it, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold): I am grateful to you, Mr. Pike, and to all the other members of the Committee for your indulgence in allowing me to be absent this morning for the important funeral of a very long-standing neighbour, and the father of my best man, in Suffolk. I was very pleased to be able to attend and I am particularly grateful to my colleagues, who must have had a hugely increased work load in standing in for me and dealing with all the amendments.

In a sense, it is a little indulgent of me to want to participate in the stand part debate, because I have not heard the whole debate on the clause, so I apologise if anything that I say is repetitious. Having said that, I want to participate because these provisions are some of the most important in the Bill. We have dealt with part 1, which deals with the regional aspect, and we

Column Number: 226

now come to part 2, which deals with the local aspect.

One of the major problems with the present planning system is the delay in producing the local plan and the structure plan. The new system is designed to replace the local plans. I worry that we will replace one system that does not work with another system that will be even slower. It will be slower because of the scheme introduced in clause 14, the documents introduced in clause 16 and the planning documents introduced in clause 18, covering all the consultations and timetables, and the Secretary of State's powers of revision, revocation and renewal. Before we accept clause 16, I hope that the Minister will assure Opposition Members on and, more importantly, planning practitioners in the widest sense, that his proposals will work in a more streamlined way than the present system, allowing more consultation with less central involvement. However, I cannot see how the new system—the introduction of those three separate elements to replace one element—will work better. I fear that we will pass this legislation in the knowledge that it will slow the whole system down.

The planning system is vital for the economic growth of this country; for individuals who wish to carry out small developments on their own houses; and for individuals, partnerships and businesses that wish to carry out larger developments. The Green Paper makes it perfectly clear that 90 per cent. of all planning applications are eventually refused; it is the remaining 10 per cent. of controversial applications that we are setting up a system to deal with. It will take a long time to deal with those controversial applications. I know that the Bill contains powers for the Secretary of State to intervene to try to make things quicker, and powers that allow the inspector to intervene. However, I suspect that we will rue the day that we agreed to this clause.

Mr. McNulty: I simply do not agree with that. With the local development scheme and the local development documents inside and outside the development plan, and with the other elements in the clause that will prescribe what comprises the local development documents that are part of the development plan, I feel that the proposals for the ways in which applications for planning permission will principally be judged in any area action plans involving major change or conservation will, by the time everything is explained through regulation as well as through the Bill, give greater clarity, speed and flexibility to a planning system that is rooted in a wider spatial dimension that goes beyond land use. As I have said before, the Bill will also set out the matters to which the planning authority must have regard when preparing the LDD. We must not forget the sustainability appraisals that must govern the proposals in each of the local development documents; or the requirement for LDDs generally to conform with the regional spatial strategy or the spatial development strategy in London; or the requirement for the authority to prepare an annual monitoring report on the implementation of the local

Column Number: 227

development scheme; or the provision for authorities to work together, which we will come to shortly.

The hon. Gentleman is entirely right to suggest that the local development documents are a key element of the Bill and the new system. However, with all that is in clause 16 and subsequent clauses, I firmly believe that the regional spatial strategy and local development framework two-tier planning system will work effectively. I commend the clause to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 16 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 17

Statement of community involvement

Mr. Clifton-Brown: I beg to move amendment No. 292, in

clause 17, page 10, line 16, after 'persons', insert 'or businesses'.

The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments:

No. 200, in

clause 17, page 10, line 16, at end insert

'live in the area covered by the local development scheme or'.

No. 201, in

clause 17, page 10, line 18, leave out 'their area' and insert

'the area covered by the development scheme'.

No. 231, in

clause 17, page 10, line 24, at end insert—

'(4) the Secretary of State may issue guidance to local planning authorities on the nature and extent of the community involvement to be provided in a statement of community involvement.'.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: Clause 17 moves from the technicalities of what is in the plans and what documents have to be produced to how the community is to be involved.

The lead amendment is a probing amendment. In a sense, we are discussing the clause in a vacuum. We have already teased out of the Minister the fact that he has appointed the consultants Llewellyn Davies to advise on the framework of the community involvement. It is regrettable that the Bill is being rushed through the House and that we are therefore discussing these matters in the absence of the consultants' report. The Minister said that he would let us have sight of it before the Bill passed through all its stages and I therefore make a special plea to him that it should be available in reasonable time before Report. It would be helpful to know from Government business managers when that is likely to be. Will it be before or after the half-term break?

In the absence of the consultants' report, we are left to speculate about what is in the Government's mind in respect of the statement of community involvement. The amendment attempts to probe whether business will have a role. Businesses have a vital economic interest in what is planned for their area and they should be involved in drawing up the plans and

Column Number: 228

documents, but it is not clear from the clause whether they will be involved.

Amendment No. 288 refers to

''the economic development plan which has been adopted by the authority and the Regional Economic Strategy for the region in which the area of the authority is situated.''

The Chairman: Order. Amendment No. 288 is not in this group of amendments.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: I apologise, Mr. Pike. I am on the wrong page in my notes. That is the problem with being absent.

The Chairman: We are considering amendment No. 292 and the others in the group.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: Amendment No. 200 was also tabled to tease out from the Minister who will be involved and who will be entitled to be involved in the community statement. Will it be those who own property in the area, who live in the area, who have a business in the area? We need answers to those questions. Amendment No. 201 also seeks to discover whether it is those who live in the area or those who live outside but who have businesses in the area who are covered by the development scheme.

Through amendment No. 231 the hon. Member for Ludlow wants the Secretary of State to issue guidance. We know all about guidance as it appears throughout the Bill, but as time goes on and things become more complex it is important for the local authorities who draw up the schemes and plans to have a precise idea what the statement will involve.

The Minister will no doubt have thought fairly carefully about what sections of the community will be involved, what role they will have in a particular area, and whether and how they will be consulted. He resisted my amendment on statements of community involvement for a region. I ask him to consider best practice, which will allow us to see how each local authority carries out the important function of preparing its statement of community involvement. Preparations will vary from one community to another, and we want to ensure that best practice is followed, because unless the local community feels involved it will become alienated from the planning system and more and more disenchanted with local authorities and other bodies involved in the system.

3.45 pm

 

---

Prepared 16 January 2003