Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Jenkin of Roding (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 November 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Planning Bill.

Planning Bill

My Lords, I tabled an amendment to government Amendment No. 140B because I was struck by the fact that the proceedings for judicial review on appeal the defendant, "““shall be the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and not the person appointed under subsection (1).””" I became immediately suspicious that this had something to do with the same issue that I shall be raising with Amendment No. 130. However, the department of the noble Baroness was extremely kind and got in touch with me this morning to say that my suspicions were wholly unfounded. The purpose of this is to enable a professional district valuer to decide whether the charge is affordable or not. It is simply, as the noble Lord said, a matter of fact. I do not intend to move my amendment.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
705 c707-8 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Compensation Appeals Charities Compulsory purchase Climate change Buildings Common land Airports Design Delegated legislation Brownfield sites Housing Fees and charges Land Liability Infrastructure Exemptions Farms Housing associations Land use Gardens Local government Planning permission Nuisance Planning Power stations Railways Parliamentary scrutiny Noise Parks Parliamentary privilege Standards Transport Sustainable development Social rented housing Roads Wind power Urban areas Regional spatial strategies Planning gain supplement Infrastructure Planning Commission Community infrastructure levy
Legislation
Planning Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk