Proceeding contribution from Baroness Andrews (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 November 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Planning Bill.
Planning Bill
My Lords, I am very grateful for the welcome given to the idea of a review. I was intrigued by the metaphor of the long grass. We will make sure that the grass is cut regularly and that the timetable for the review is fit for purpose. I would be very bold to set a timetable for the review without knowing the full scope that will be necessary. It is important that we identify the problem, ask the right questions and set the terms of reference on that basis—I will try to keep noble Lords informed about that—and then work out a timetable that enables us to carry out the review thoroughly. For all the reasons that the noble Earl and the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, have elucidated, these are complicated issues. There is a long history. The complication of curtilage, for example, in itself gives us pause for thought when we look at how best to address it without undue consequences for people who legitimately want to use their gardens. PPS3 has been rather diminished in our debates but, in fact, it makes it quite clear. Although it does not mention back gardens specifically, it states that local authorities should develop a locally set brownfield target which can be broken down into different targets for different categories of brownfield land if necessary. Authorities with a positive policy of active management of gardens start from there, and we will be able to learn from them how they manage that and other issues. The noble Earl also asked what the terms of reference were likely to cover. He made some useful suggestions, which can be read in Hansard by officials and Ministers, who will now think about how we can best do this so that we get a result that is genuinely productive. My noble friend made the point in the other place yesterday that some gardens, according to the statistics, have been replaced by homes with gardens, so we are not looking necessarily at a total net loss. You often find the same thing with green spaces, too; allotments that are sold under the conditions in which they can be sold are often replaced by other forms of green space. This is exactly why we have to look closely at the issue and at what we plan to do. We had a positive and useful debate in this House. We have a good outcome and I am grateful to noble Lords for supporting this. On Question, Motion agreed to.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 705 c1355-6
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Delegated legislation Brownfield sites Housing Finance Fees and charges Land Infrastructure Land use Gardens Planning permission Planning Parliamentary scrutiny Property development Parks Regional planning and development Urban areas Community infrastructure levy Parliamentary privilege
- Legislation
- Planning Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-05-13 12:19:07 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_511795
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_511795
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_511795