Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Hazel Blears (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 June 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Planning Bill.


Planning Bill

Equally, I cannot understand the hon. Gentleman's concerns. It is always appropriate to set rules about how inquiries should be conducted, with guidelines as to how matters should be explored, and what the time scales should be. I do not accept that cross-examination is the holy grail when it comes to testing evidence and arriving at the truth. He will know that legal systems around the world take a different, more inquisitorial approach. The aim with planning inquiries is to balance various parties' interests, and the commission's ability to ask questions in an inquisitorial process may well lead to better results and information than could be achieved otherwise. The trouble with the sort of predetermined process that is the alternative is that people dance around trying to make the best argument, but do not uncover the truth and the best evidence. I counsel the hon. Gentleman against that.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
478 c351 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Compensation Aerials Compulsory purchase Conservation Airports Brownfield sites Health Fees and charges Land Liability Infrastructure Heathrow Airport Local government Ministerial powers National security Planning permission Pollution Planning Nuclear power Power stations Railways Listed buildings Mobile phones Parliamentary scrutiny Public participation Scotland Telecommunications Regional planning and development Wales Trees Regional development agencies Tree preservation orders Infrastructure Planning Commission National policy statements Community infrastructure levy
Legislation
Planning Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk