---

Planning Bill

My Lords, I want to speak in particular to Amendments Nos. 129A and 136B, but the point I shall make also stands in support of government Amendment No. 135A, which is grouped separately. Taken together, these amendments are extremely welcome. They address some of the principal concerns of London First and the British property industry regarding the proposals for the community infrastructure levy. Amendment No. 129A removes the reference to ““land value”” from the Bill. I will not rehearse again my contribution in Committee save to say that, as CIL is not a tax on land value, it must not be allowed to be misconstrued as such. The amendment resolves that issue, as does Amendment No. 135A, which makes a further reference to land value in Clause 202(9). Equally welcome is Amendment No. 136B, which makes it clear that a charging authority must have regard to the ““economic viability of development”” when setting the CIL. It must not be set at a level that would stop land being brought forward for development, especially in these challenging economic times.