Proceeding contribution from Greg Clark (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 17 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Localism Bill.
Localism Bill (ways and means)
The right hon. Gentleman is disappointed that this is not the cunning plot that he sensed it might be. It is a straightforward clarification, and he needs to accept that it is not what he thought it was. It is a simple and straightforward clarification brought about by the fact that it has been suggested in the press that some of these payments cannot be taken into account. It is important that councils understand that, where it is relevant to the planning matter in hand—but not otherwise—they can continue to take it into account. That is no different from the present situation, and it is important to clarify that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 528 c271
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Appeals Councillors Conduct Betting shops EU law Fines Fire and rescue services Electoral systems EU grants and loans Local government Pay Local government finance Powers Planning Opening hours Local government services Sustainable development Taxation Retail trade Sunday trading Secretaries of state Mayors Department for Communities and Local Government Community infrastructure levy
- Legislation
- Localism Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:24:14 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743831
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743831
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743831