Proceeding contribution from Baroness Andrews (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 June 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Housing and Regeneration Bill.
Housing and Regeneration Bill
I can answer the noble Lord’s question; that is very surprising, I know. The prescribed requirements that would have enabled the URA to make full use of the powers which it was granted by the 1993 Act were never made. This means that, had the URA wished to move any human remains, it would have had to rely on the provisions in the Burial Act 1857, which would have required it to obtain a faculty or licence from a bishop or a licence from the Secretary of State. We do not centrally hold records regarding these, so are unable to say whether any has ever been sought or received. That has not taken us a long way forward, but perhaps it gives us a bit of colourful background to why we cannot answer the question.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 702 c80GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Companies Compulsory purchase Cemeteries Brownfield sites Allotments National landscapes Housing Land Land use Green belt Local government Planning permission Planning Property development National parks Unadopted roads Waiting lists Transport Utilities Rights of way Regeneration Homes and Communities Agency
- Legislation
- Housing and Regeneration Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:39:01 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_477023
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_477023
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_477023