Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Peter Bone (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 2 June 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Planning Bill.


Planning Bill

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's intervention, but I am afraid that I disagree again. My argument is that the proposal must command the support of both Houses. Whether this House or the other has primacy is another debate. The idea that the other place should not be given a vote because its Members are not elected does not bear scrutiny, because I understand that the Government's policy is to have an elected upper Chamber. However, that is a different issue. If there are to be highly important national policy statements, they must command the widest support. If the Government cannot get their way, they need to revise the policy until it commands widespread support in both Houses. It is therefore important that votes are held at the end of the process. Any system that gives power to the Secretary of State is undemocratic.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
476 c598 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Compulsory purchase Construction Coastal areas Climate change Crown lands and estates Common land Airports Land Licensing Environment protection Infrastructure Land use Isles of Scilly Local government Planning authorities Planning permission Planning Ports Natural gas Railways Parliamentary scrutiny National Trust Scotland Storage Sustainable development Wales Roads Rights of way Electromagnetic fields Infrastructure Planning Commission National policy statements
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk