Skip to main content

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


Planning Bill

Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. When you mistakenly called me to speak a few minutes ago, I thought that you were asking for a speech on the real opposition to the Bill. I have just listened to what the hon. Member for Beckenham (Mrs. Lait) had to say. I should like to thank my right hon. Friends on the Front Bench for the open and constructive way in which they have conducted the consideration of the Bill. I listened to the hon. Member for Beckenham talking about the Conservatives' proposal to scrap the IPC as part of the review. My idea of carrying out a review is that we should look at how something is operating and, on the basis of that evidence, decide whether we like what we see or whether we want to change it. We should not prejudge these things in advance. Apart from the hon. Lady's well-rehearsed arguments about who should take the final decisions, and her suggestion that she might change the name of the IPC and call it the planning inspectorate mark 2, I have not heard any detailed proposals on what the Conservatives would put in place of our provisions if they were in government. I have heard a few soundbites, but there is no substance to their proposals. It is important that we get this right in order to tackle climate change. I welcome the community infrastructure levy. It is a positive measure to help the regeneration of our cities, to which I am very committed, and for which I want local authorities to have the appropriate resources. The fact that the provision will be embedded in the planning system and have local democratic accountability—it will be part of the work of the local authorities that are accountable to their communities—is a major step forward. This is an improvement on the planning gain supplement. I know that there are still issues to be worked out. The whole question of valuation and how we work it into the system is a difficult one, but the concept is nevertheless right and it deserves support.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
478 c457 
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