Proceeding contribution from Simon Kirby (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)
I shall speak briefly to new clause 5, which stands in my name. The new clause is designed to allow the Secretary of State to change, by order, any piece of planning legislation that is causing any planning authority problems in carrying out its statutory duties or where a particular piece of planning legislation is causing local public controversy. I appreciate that this is an extensive power for the Secretary of State, but I also propose, as part of the same amendment, a strong safeguard in that a variation in the law may be made only if it has been subject to a positive resolution of both Houses of Parliament. The need for such a power is evidenced by an issue in my constituency. Brighton Marina was built in the 1970s following the lengthy passage of the Brighton Marina Act 1968. The marina is located in an undercliff location on land that was reclaimed from the sea. From the coast road anyone looking at the marina can gaze downwards to see the boats, shops, restaurants, businesses and low-rise accommodation located there. For many years the 1968 Act has been taken to mean that any development above cliff height would be only for ancillary works, such as lamp posts and fencing. However, in recent years, that has been challenged by proposals for housing development that would rise well above the cliff height. One such scheme was agreed by Brighton and Hove city council but not acted on, and one was turned down by the council. That refusal was sustained last year by my right hon. Friend on appeal, for which I am grateful. Both these developments were highly controversial and there was a clear difference of opinion between residents and the planning authority as to the intention of the 1968 Act. If my amendment to the Bill had been in place, that difference of opinion would not have occurred, because the legislation would have been crystal clear. Instead, we have had years of wrangling and uncertainty and still have no clear view of the meaning of the 1968 Act even now. The thrust of the coalition Government's policy is to simplify, eliminate and clarify the rules, regulations and legislation faced daily by the public and businesses. My new clause would add significantly to the practical implementation of that policy, and I commend it to the House.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 528 c282-3
- 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 16:25:18 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743861
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743861
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743861