Proceeding contribution from Lord Whitehead (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 17 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill 2005-06.
As amended in the Standing Committee, further considered.
Yes indeed, and that underlines my point that there is a boundary on permitted development orders that local authorities can apply, and also, through the general permitted development order, a boundary on the extent to which permitted development orders apply in any event. If one applies that logic, a biomass plant might extend the curtilage of a particular properly by more than 15 per cent., which would be outside the terms of the general permitted development order. Similarly, if a wind turbine went well above the roofline or beyond the building line, that would also be beyond the terms of the general permitted development order, so there are boundaries anyway. The difference that is suggested is very modest indeed. It would simply clarify the terms under which microgeneration devices—which were not in existence when permitted development orders were first thought about in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990—might be attached by householders to their households, in the same way as, under other circumstances, they might introduce a roof extension or a porch to their house. The suggestion in clause 9 is that if a review agrees that that is a good idea, householders who wanted to put solar panels on the roof who, in other times and places, might have considered that it was necessary to apply for planning permission, would not after that general permitted development order was put in place have to do so in any local authority in the country, subject to all the conditions and the constraints that I have mentioned. The result for microgeneration would be that there would be clarity throughout the country in terms of what one could or could not do. A person who was installing a modest device would not have to go through the red tape. Cost is also involved. The price of a small wind turbine, such as the Leader of the Opposition is considering for his house, comes to about £1,500. As things stand, the Leader of the Opposition would have to spend perhaps £300 or £400 of that £1,500 on seeking planning permission, with all that that entails, to get that device on to his house. Our suggestion is both modest and economical. It takes out of the realm of red tape those modest devices within the overall constraint of permitted development orders that could aid microgeneration and thereby help householders to generate the power that they consume in their households without recourse to the national grid.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 443 c1744-5
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Combined heat and power Climate change Environment protection Energy Electricity generation Ofgem Planning Scotland Wind power Carbon emissions Fuel cells
- Legislation
- Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:16:31 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_309849
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_309849
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_309849