---

Infrastructure Planning (Decisions) Regulations 2010

I am grateful to the noble Lord for that clarification. He is correct: both Houses will have the opportunity to scrutinise NPSs, and I understand the point he makes in respect of the role of that scrutiny. The noble Lord, Lord Bates, said that the primary legislation is somehow defective because we are now picking up things that need to be included in the order. It would not have been appropriate to amend these matters in the Bill. It was always intended that the detailed matters of the current framework would be applied in this way. These matters are detailed, and primary legislation sets the framework only. That is not uncommon in legislation; it is not only in planning legislation. The noble Lord asked whether the adversarial or the inquisitorial method is better. The new system will provide objectors with opportunities to have their views heard. Examinations under the new process will be structured in an inquisitorial rather than an adversarial manner. Panels of commissioners will proactively examine and test the evidence before them. This will not only speed up the process of examining applications, but will improve the analysis of the key issues, allowing the commission to focus its examination on the key points and test them thoroughly. The new system also means that the debate about national need will not feature in the examination process. It will be established by the relevant national policy statement.