---

Planning-gain Supplement (Preparations) Bill

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention. It seems to me that the Financial Secretary gave the House an excuse rather than a guarantee, but we were looking for something closer to the latter than the former. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will contribute later in the debate, because I note that he opposes the concept. This month he said this to the Estates Gazette about the PGS:"““This incredibly bureaucratic scheme will cause endless arguments. It will create a new army of experts in depreciating the value of land.””" He is on the record as being against the PGS, and I hope that we will hear him spell out his reasons in more detail in a few minutes’ time, if he is lucky enough to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker. Crucially, the decisions on where to spend PGS revenue will be taken by unelected and unrepresentative regional bodies, which are often centred many miles away from the communities in question and are not elected by the people concerned. After the Government’s overwhelming defeat in the referendum on whether to establish regional government in the north-east—by, incidentally, a margin of 78 per cent. to 22 per cent.—the Deputy Prime Minister, no less, conceded this to the press:"““The North East public have answered in an emphatic way. I am a democrat and I accept that…it was an overwhelming defeat for the proposal.””" Given that ““overwhelming defeat””, those bodies no longer possess any moral or political authority with which to administer the concept, even if the House of Commons were to allow it.