---

Planning-gain Supplement (Preparations) Bill

A planning gain supplement levied at a modest rate that nevertheless raised additional revenue to support infrastructure is precisely the kind of source of additional funds that will be required to support the developments that we need in the hon. Gentleman’s area and in others. On the wider application of the PGS to devolved Administrations, whether in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, the Government have clearly reiterated several points that are worth setting out to the House. First, we have said that all PGS revenues from a devolved country will be returned in full to that country. Secondly, we have said that the devolved Administrations will have discretion over how PGS revenues from their country will be used to support infrastructure. That is not, as the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) suggested, a fundamental problem, but a fundamental principle of devolution. Thirdly, we have said that we will undertake detailed further work with the devolved Administrations and with interested parties in those countries to examine the introduction of a planning gain supplement as regards areas of devolved policy such as planning obligation agreements, including section 75 agreements in Scotland and article 40 agreements in Northern Ireland. The new clause suggests that work with the devolved Administrations on how the PGS would operate across the UK has not yet been done. That is plain wrong—it is already taking place. We are currently undertaking the second round of consultations on the PGS. As I said, we received several important contributions to the first consultation, which have had an important influence on the way in which we have developed proposals since. The views that came to us from Scotland have been decisive in helping us to come to the view that Scotland should keep 100 per cent. of PGS revenues that may be raised there and that Scotland should have full discretion over the use of those revenues for supporting infrastructure in Scotland—commitments that have been welcomed by Scotland’s First Minister. In addition, start notices, which are already a feature of the planning system in Scotland, could play a useful part in any PGS. On planning obligations, our proposal to use a common starting point from the negotiations on affordable housing also draws heavily on the approach that is already in place in Scotland. It is worth being clear that the Government do not propose, nor could we propose under the devolution settlement, to mandate how devolved policies are conducted. The determination of section 75 planning agreements would rightly remain the preserve of the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament. Nothing in any proposed PGS policy, and certainly nothing in the Bill, would legally require changes to Scotland’s planning policy. As the PGS would be a national tax applying across the UK, decisions on whether it should be enacted, and if so how, will be the preserve of this Parliament. The new clause is less about the Bill and more about the underlying policy of the PGS. The only major matter of substance in the Bill relating to Scotland is that Scotland is not specified in it. That is because preparatory expenditure needing new powers under the Bill would not be incurred by the Scottish Executive. The Bill itself will place no additional burdens or requirements on Scotland. Any introduction of a PGS, together with its application across the UK, would be preceded by debate and substantive legislation on the wider policy. That would provide the opportunity to examine in detail any concerns about the design and operation of a PGS. The Bill is a narrow, specific, paving measure. The new clause would frustrate its purpose and I hope that the hon. Member for Rayleigh will not press it. If he does, I shall have to ask my hon. Friends to oppose it.