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, that is an exceedingly disappointing reply. The noble Baroness has made no attempt to answer the point that was made in an intervention by the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart. How can the other place decide whether to waive its privilege if we do not put this amendment into the Bill? It will simply go back and that will be that. I am determined to test the opinion of the House. On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 130) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 90; Not-Contents, 96.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 705 c716
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 23:34:22 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508681
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508681
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508681