Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Iain Wright (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 7 May 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Thatched Roofs (Planning Policy).


Thatched Roofs (Planning Policy)

I disagree with the right hon. Gentleman. Such work is carried out with regard to some listed buildings. I maintain the point that visual appearance is crucial. I also think that it is not the sole consideration. When it comes to construction, other things that are important as well. The main theme of my contribution today is that flexibility is necessary. None of us wants to see an erosion—quite literally—of the thatching profession. We want to see thatchers prosper as much as possible. As regards energy efficiency, thatched roofs are on the increase, because of the sustainable and green technique that is used for insulation. Planning officers should have the flexibility to ensure that we preserve the historic environment as much as possible while taking into account local circumstances, which was eloquently mentioned by the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire with regard to shortage of materials and rising prices. I hope that that explains the point. English Heritage's guidance note also recommends that the relevant Government bodies and specialist organisations should investigate the supply of thatching materials and endeavour to remove some of the uncertainties that have distorted the market. It recognises that that is probably the most intractable problem facing the thatching industry and points out that while the importation of foreign materials is not promoted under general conservation philosophy, it can be argued that those sources provide a degree of reliability. It says that the reasons for straw shortages need to be explored to create a climate that is more attractive to the specialist branch of agriculture and to experimentation with thatching strains. None of that suggests that the Government or their specialist advisers have taken an extreme or excessively rigid line on heritage issues in compiling guidance on thatching and listed building consent procedures. As the right hon. Gentlemen know, I will not comment on specific instances in which a local authority might have refused consent, or adopted conditions, on grounds that the applicant might consider are due to an inflexible approach. In such circumstances, as I have mentioned, there is recourse to the appeals procedure. I recognise that concerns exist about the present state of the market and the effect that that is having on the trade and, therefore, on owners of thatched houses. The important message that I want to get across today is that there should be full discussion and consultation with all concerned, including conservation and planning officers, owners, specialist bodies, trade associations and relevant arms of Government to resolve such difficulties as they arise. That brings me on to the three points mentioned by the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire. I certainly agree to attend a meeting with relevant people, including him, not only because this is an important issue that needs to be thrashed out—so to speak—but because of my respect for him following his work on the Housing and Regeneration Bill. I am keen to meet him shortly to discuss the issues more comprehensively. I am more reluctant on the right hon. Gentleman's second point, which concerns revising particular sections of PPG15. The existing planning framework is appropriate and gives sufficient flexibility to take into account particular circumstances.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
475 c270-2WH 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Conservation Housing Planning Listed buildings Sustainable development Thatched roofing
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk