---

As amended in the Standing Committee, further considered.

The hon. Gentleman comes at me with these short statements. He thinks that permitted development rights allow for one television aerial or one satellite dish without the need to get planning permission. That is fine, but unfortunately he has said nothing to suggest that the power would be used to prohibit the erection of more than one 1kW windmill generator on one particular set of premises. I am glad that I gave way to him because I recall our days in Southampton when we closely debated political issues, and it is good to renew that acquaintance across the Chamber, but he has not satisfied my concerns. I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s point about bureaucracy and bureaucratic obstacles. I also understand how unsatisfactory some people, in particular the enthusiasts for microgeneration, might find a situation in which some local authorities allow people to put solar panels on their houses or to erect windmills without the need for planning permission, but others do not. Surely, however, it is a virtue of the nature of our society that we believe in localism, which necessarily involves individuality and diversity. He seems to want to promote uniformity and stereotyping. That cannot be a good thing. The idea of putting up lots of new windmills or photovoltaic equipment may be thought of as a good thing in some parts of the country, but why should an elected local authority not be able to decide the policy for itself? If we remove the clause, it will not prevent the use of permitted development orders to relax the planning regime for some parts of the microgeneration industry. It will not do that at all, and any suggestion that the clause is a vital part of the Bill is misconceived. However, the Minister has, I think, accepted that as drafted, clause 9 is open to misinterpretation. He says that it does not reflect his intention, but we are dealingwith legislation that has to be precise in its content. I hope that he will support me in the Division Lobby when I put the amendment to a vote. Removing the clause from the Bill will enable the Government to table a much better drafted version in the other place to make his intentions clearer and to put safeguards on the face of the Bill. I would welcome those, but at the moment they are articulated only in terms of expressions of intention by the Minister and the promoter, rather than being guarantees, which they would be if they appeared in the Bill. The debate has been constructive. The size of microgeneration plants causes a lot of concern. The Government have given us assurances about that. If we vote to remove the clause, they will be able to present clearer, fresh proposals that are more in tune with their real intentions. Question put, That the amendment be made:— The House divided: Ayes 2, Noes 72.