Proceeding contribution from John Healey (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 15 January 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Planning-gain Supplement (Preparations) Bill.
Planning-gain Supplement (Preparations) Bill
I think that the hon. Gentleman might have misheard me. If he checks the record, he will find that I said that we are currently considering whether a threshold for small-scale non-residential developments may be warranted, which is the hon. Gentleman’s concern. In fact, home improvements would not be covered by a planning gain supplement, but smaller scale residential developments, which often may not be captured by planning obligations and section 106 agreements at present, would be covered by the PGS. That is one of the principal points in favour of the potential planning gain supplement: its potential application may be much wider than the current obligations allow.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 455 c567
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Community development Administration Costs Housing Land ICT Investment Infrastructure Government departments Land use Local government Northern Ireland Planning Public expenditure Property development Valuation Taxation Tax yields Revenue and Customs Department for Communities and Local Government Planning gain supplement
- Legislation
- Planning-gain Supplement (Preparations) Bill 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:13:44 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369322
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369322
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369322