Mr.
Ainsworth: I am grateful to the Minister. I understand the
problem of consultation overload, and I recognise that, for
understandable reasons, some people think that consultation is often an
excuse for inaction. I particularly asked not only about green NGOs,
but organisations concerned with fuel poverty. It is not my experience
that either of those groups resent being consulted, and I hope that she
will confirm that they will be consulted in this
case.
Joan
Ruddock: As I was referring to green NGOs, I recalled that
the hon. Gentleman had asked about fuel poverty. He mentioned the NEA
and air source heat pumps. Since I have been responsible for the fuel
poverty strategy, I have looked at its delivery, particularly how we
might do better for those who are in fuel poverty in the hardest to
treat properties. I have made it clear that new technology offers a
solution to those problems. The warm-front scheme has been piloting
both solar and air source heat pumps, and we have now made changes in
the scheme to allow the delivery of those new forms of technology. We
are completely with him. That approach offers a potential solution. We
shall need to get on with it. We have made the provision, and we are
already piloting it so there is no question, but that the particular
consultation will be available to those who are concerned about fuel
poverty. I hope very much that they will
respond.
Martin
Horwood: I am certainly not against consultation, but
having been consulted three times about flooding during the past two
years since my county flooded, I know that sometimes one good
consultation might be better than three not so good ones. My specific
question was not so much about green NGOs, but that the phraseology in
the original draft was about persons interested in preserving visual
amenity in the appearance of the countryside and also parish councils
and the farming community. Will the hon. Lady specifically reassure the
Committee on each of those counts and confirm that those groups and
bodies will be
consulted?
Joan
Ruddock: I was, in fact, responding to the hon. Member for
East Surrey directly about the green NGOs and I was about to come to
the point made by the hon. Member for Cheltenham about those whom he
believes are missing from the strategy. All of those who he named
obviously have an interest in such matters, and I assure him that we
shall endeavour to make all parties aware of the consultation and
encourage their responding to
it. I
was about to conclude, but I must say first that, in preparing the
strategy the Government will have to have regard to the promotion of
energy efficiency, meaning efficiency in the use by consumers of
electricity and gas conveyed through pipes or any other energy source.
Energy efficiency plays an important and central role in our
long-term energy goals. In the context of microgeneration policy, work
has taken place to demonstrate the benefits of combining energy
efficiency and microgeneration technologies in reducing the carbon
footprint of buildings. In summary, and for the reasons that I have set
out, the Government oppose that clause 3 should stand part
of the Bill and wish to replace it with new clause 1 in due
course.
Mr.
Ainsworth: This short debate has been interesting. As for
the issues raised by the hon. Member for Southampton, Test, my
understanding for what it is worth is that the hon. Member for
Cambridge is right. Clearly, there is a degree of uncertainty and it
would be enormously helpful if the Minister wrote to all members of the
Committee with clarification at the earliest opportunity. As I have
already made clear to the Committee, I am very content with the
Government’s new clause and I hope that it finds its way into
the
Bill. Question
put and
negatived. Clause
3 accordingly disagreed
to.
Clause
4Review
of permitted development
orders Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to consider the
following: new clause 3— Microgeneration: non-domestic
land— ‘(1) The Secretary
of State must consider amending the GPDO for the purpose of
facilitating the installation of equipment for microgeneration on
non-domestic land in
England. (2) In subsection (1)
“non-domestic land” means buildings, or other land, other
than a dwellinghouse or land within the curtilage of a
dwellinghouse. (3)
Consideration under subsection (1) must begin within
6 months beginning with the coming into force of this
Act. (4) The Secretary of State
must, as soon as reasonably practicable, lay a report before Parliament
setting out the outcome of the consideration under subsection
(1). (5) In considering what,
if any, amendments should be made to the GPDO, the Secretary of
State— (a) must have
regard to the results of any relevant consultation which has been
carried out by the Secretary of State in relation to the GPDO;
and (b) may carry out further
consultation if the Secretary of State thinks it
appropriate. (6) In this
section “microgeneration” has the same meaning as in
section [Microgeneration:
dwellinghouses].’. This
clause, intended to replace Clause 4 of the Bill, requires the
Secretary of State to consider amending the GPDO to grant permitted
development rights for microgeneration equipment on non-domestic land.
The amendment requires the Secretary of State to take account of
earlier consultations and also enables further
consultation. Amendment
(a), in line 6, after subsection (2),
insert— ‘(2A) The Secretary
of State must, within two years of the coming into force of this
section, bring forward proposals to introduce micro-hydro power, to be
included in subsection
(2).’. 3.30
pm
Mr.
Ainsworth: This is becoming rather hair-raising. Clause 4
and new clause 3 concern microgeneration on non-domestic land. The
original Bill referred specifically to considerations about permitted
development orders and permitted development rights in relation to
agricultural land. This new clause refers to non-domestic land, which
includes every piece of land that is not within the curtilage of what
is inelegantly called a “dwelling house”. That includes
agricultural land and therefore addresses the issue originally raised
by organisations such as the Nation Farmers Union and the Country Land
and Business Association. The clause also allows sufficient flexibility
for objections to be taken into account through consultation while
stopping short of conferring an absolute duty to consult. I welcome the
Minister’s comments on that
approach. Amendment
(a) was tabled by the hon. Member for Cheltenham. I think he said
during an earlier debate that he did not intend to press this, and my
view is that it is unnecessary as the provisions are included in new
clause 3(5)(a). It is good news to hear that the Government are already
consulting on these matters—or, if not already, are very shortly
to do so. I think the Liberal Democrat amendment is unnecessary for
those reasons and I hope that they withdraw
it.
Joan
Ruddock: As has been anticipated by the hon. Gentleman, we
are seeking to remove clause 4 in order to substitute new clause 3 in
its place. I shall come to the merits of new clause 3 later, but I
shall quickly explain why the Government cannot support clause 4 as it
stands. Finally, I am afraid, I will have to explain why the Government
oppose amendment
(a). The
previous Energy Minister, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member
for North Warwickshire (Mr. O'Brien), outlined at Second
Reading that the Government support the intention behind clause 4 and
already plan to fulfil the commitments placed upon them by that clause.
Clause 4 require the Government to review the effect in England of
development orders made under section 59(2)(a) of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990. Subsection (2)
outlines: “The
purpose of the review is to provide information to assist the Secretary
of State to form an opinion as to what provision such development
orders should make to facilitate development in England consisting of
the installation of equipment, apparatus or appliances for
microgeneration.” Subsection
(2) prescribes the scope of the review with reference to particular
types of land,
namely “agricultural
land or within the curtilage of an agricultural
building” or “within
the curtilage of non-domestic
premises,”. As
Members may know, as the hon. Gentleman has just said, the Government
intend to consult on proposals for permitted development rights for a
range of microgeneration equipment on non-domestic land later this
summer. We would like the review to be able to take account of all
non-domestic land and do not want the review to be constrained by
consideration of the types of land specified in clause 4. Our
consultation may include proposals to restrict the scope of permitted
development rights to install certain types of microgeneration
equipment on particular categories of land, but that is something that
should be the subject of consultation and should not be constrained at
this stage. We are also concerned that clause 4(3) places a requirement
to consult persons appearing to represent a number of specified
persons. We want our consultation to be as open as possible and
inclusive of all groups and individuals who may have an interest in the
proposals. We are concerned that by specifying individual groups,
particularly when some of the categories may be open to interpretation,
may send the wrong signals to stakeholders, who may feel excluded if
they are not specifically listed in the Bill. Finally, subsection (6)
defines agricultural land and agricultural holdings with reference to
the Local Government Finance Act 1998. As we propose to remove
references to specific land types—for example, agricultural
land—subsection (6) is superfluous if new clause 3 is accepted
in place of clause 4.
The
Government have consequently laid new clause 3 to replace clause 4 of
the existing Bill and I will outline its key aspects. New clause 3
requires the Secretary of State to consider amending the Town and
Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, the GPDO,
for the purposes of granting permitted development rights for
microgeneration equipment on non-domestic land. As I said, the
Government already plan to consult later this summer on
proposals for permitted development rights for a range of
microgeneration equipment on non-domestic land. Non-domestic land is
defined as buildings or other land that is not a dwelling house or
within the curtilage of a dwelling house. That is a very broad
definition which will allow us to consult on proposals for permitted
development rights for microgeneration equipment on a wide range of
land uses. While our consultation proposals may restrict the scope of
particular types of microgeneration equipment to particular types of
land, it should be the subject of consultation and not be constrained.
The clause requires that the Government must begin consideration of
potential amendments to the GPDO within six months of the Act coming
into force. We are already in the process of preparing consultation
proposals and we hope to show demonstrable progress within the
six-month time frame specified in the clause. New clause 3
requires the Secretary of State to lay before Parliament a report
setting out the outcome of the Government’s consideration. That
requirement is similar to those contained in clause 4 of the current
Bill. Subsection
(5) of new clause 3 requires the Secretary of State, when considering
what amendments to the legislation might be necessary,
to have regard to the results of any
relevant consultation in relation to the GPDO. The provision is
included because consultation on potential amendments to the GPDO is
likely to be underway, or may even be completed, by the time the Bill
may come into force. Subsection (5) ensures that the Government will be
able to take account of any relevant consultation exercise they have
undertaken if the Bill gets Royal Assent. Subsection (5) grants a power
to allow the Secretary of State to carry out further consultation if
appropriate. That has been included as a safeguard, as we cannot
prejudge the outcome of the consultation and, I am sorry to say this,
further consultation may be necessary.
Finally, I
turn to amendment (a). The Government fully support the intention
behind the amendment but we do not think it is necessary because of
provisions already contained in proposed new clause 3. I am grateful to
the hon. Member for Cheltenham for already indicating that he is not
going to press it to a
vote.
Martin
Horwood: I am grateful to the Minister and I will
certainly stand by my promise to the Committee. There is one specific
reference in amendment (a) which does not appear in new clause 3, which
is to a consultation having been
“undertaken
before the day on which this Act is
passed”. I
will be even more content if the Minister could be absolutely clear
that a consultation completed at the time this Bill passes will be
taken into consideration—because that is not explicit in new
clause
3.
Joan
Ruddock: I can indeed. I am absolutely certain of that. I
was about to say to the hon. Gentleman and the Committee that the
amendment is intended to ensure that any consultation undertaken before
the day on which the Act is passed is as effective as if it had been
carried out after the Act is passed. We very much support that. The
consultation document we plan to issue later this summer will set out
our proposals for permitted development rights for microgeneration
equipment on non-domestic land and clearly we do not want to have to
repeat a consultation exercise in the light of the Act being passed, if
we can achieve the same
outcome by consulting on proposals this summer. I hope that that has
made the matter absolutely clear to the hon. Gentleman. That is why
subsection (5) of new clause 3 deals with consultation and requires the
Government to take account of
consultation: “which
has been carried out...in relation to the
GPDO”. Arguably,
subsection (5) covers everything that the hon. Gentleman’s
proposed amendment would have achieved.
Subsection
(5) places no time limit on consultation and it can be read as
requiring the Government to take account of the results of any relevant
consultation that might have taken place prior to or after the Bill is
passed. It provides a power to carry out further consultation, if
necessary, although I understand that members of the Committee hope
that it will not be necessary; indeed, I also hope that it will not be
necessary. Therefore,
I believe that subsection (5), which has been proposed by the
Government, meets the intention of the hon. Gentleman’s
amendment and I ask the Committee to reject that
amendment. Question
put and
negatived. Clause
4 accordingly disagreed
to.
Clause
5Permitted
development: domestic premises
Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
The
Chairman: With this, it will be convenient to discuss the
following: new clause 2— Microgeneration:
dwellinghouses— ‘(1) The
Secretary of State must amend the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 (S.I.
1995/418) (the “GPDO”), in relation to England, to
provide for the grant of planning permission for specified classes of
equipment for microgeneration on, or within the curtilage of, a
dwellinghouse. (2) The classes
of equipment for microgeneration specified by virtue of subsection (1)
must be or include wind turbines and air source heat
pumps. (3)
“Specified” in subsections (1) and (2) means specified in
the GPDO. (4) The amendment
mentioned in subsection (1) must be made within 6 months beginning with
the coming into force of this
Act. (5) Provision by virtue of
subsection (1) may grant planning permission subject to limitations,
exceptions or conditions. (6)
The Secretary of State must review the effect of the amendment of the
GPDO as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of 2 years
beginning with the date on which the amendment comes into
force. (7) In this section
“microgeneration” has the meaning given by section 82 of
the Energy Act
2004.’. This
clause, intended to replace Clause 5 of the Bill, requires amendments
to the GPDO to grant permitted development rights for wind turbines and
air source heat pumps within 6 months of the Bill’s coming into
force. It also requires a review of these amendments after 2
years. Amendment
(a), in line 6, after subsection (2),
insert— ‘(2A) The Secretary
of State must, within two years of the coming into force of this
section, bring forward proposals to introduce micro-hydro power, to be
included in subsection
(2).’.
| 
