---

Planning Bill

The right reverend Prelate has raised an interesting matter, and I shall study what the Minister has said about it. However, I come back to subsection (5). The Minister did not seem to recognise that there is a difference between the earlier Acts that he quoted—where the Secretary of State has the power to amend, alter, modify and so on—and the Bill, under which this unelected body would have that power. To rely, as the Minister has done, on the earlier legislation is a grave mistake, because to does not say that. In those cases, the Secretary of State makes an order and, for some of them, under the Transport and Works Act 1992, he must then put an order before Parliament. I understand that the Government’s purpose here is to accelerate the process, something that has been recognised on all sides of the Committee as desirable and, indeed, necessary. However, changing the law should not be a function of a body like the IPC. At least, it should not do so without the consent of the Minister; that should be part of the formal process. It is insufficient to say, ““the Minister may scrutinise””, or ““Parliament may scrutinise””. Parliament cannot do anything about it under the law. If Parliament had more powers—over the national planning statements, as I have argued previously—that might make a difference. Currently, however, this is all made by policy being promulgated. Scrutiny by itself, without any powers, is not enough. I hope that the Minister will look at this again, and assure him that we will come back to it on Report. Of course we shall study what he has said and the various precedents. At the moment, however, I am wholly unconvinced.