Written question asked by Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Conservative) on Wednesday, 10 December 2003, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Wednesday, 17 December 2003. It was answered by Keith Hill (Labour) on Wednesday, 17 December 2003 on behalf of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Question: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, what the estimated cost is of setting up the new tariff system in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill as the alternative to the section 106 (Town and Country Planning Act 1990); and whether the section 106 procedure will change under the Bill. - Including ref to the partial Regulatory Impact Assessment which accompanies the Government's consultation document, Contributing Sustainable Communities - a new approach to planning obligations.

Answer: Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the estimated cost is of setting up the new tariff system in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill as the alternative to the section 106 (Town and Country Planning Act 1990); and whether the section 106 procedure will change under the Bill. [144204] Keith Hill: The issue of the cost of establishing and operating the optional planning charge system is addressed in the partial Regulatory Impact Assessment which accompanies the Government's consultation document "Contributing Sustainable Communities--a new approach to planning obligations", published on 6 November 2003. Nothing in the Bill precludes the negotiated route being the same in character as the way s106 operates now. The Government's consultation document proposes some improvements to the way in which planning obligations are negotiated, mainly by promoting good practice, where the developer opts for the negotiated route rather than pay the optional planning charge. We will await the results of the consultation before deciding whether any changes to the negotiated procedure are appropriate.

Secondary information