Proceeding contribution from Andrew Miller (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 20 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Local Government and Planning (Parkland and Windfall Development) Bill.
Local Government and Planning (Parkland and Windfall Development) Bill
I agree with my hon. Friend, although I thought about taking issue when he used the word ““redundant””. However, he then referred to land that is redundant for that purpose. There is an argument, which I shall come to in a moment, about the circumstances in which it may be appropriate for a local authority or a public landowner to change the use of land. I am slightly concerned that the Bill might be too prescriptive to meet the principal point made by the hon. Member for Solihull about dealing with rogue landowners such as Solihull council.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 450 c1138
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Appeals Community development Construction Housing Environment protection Land use Gardens Local government Planning permission Parks Sales Trees Greenfield sites
- Legislation
- Local Government and Planning (Parkland and Windfall Development) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:49:58 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_353551
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_353551
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_353551