Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Robert Neill (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Localism Bill.


Localism Bill

Yes, the corporations could act in that way. They do not have to, because we have not been as specific as was the case in the past with the old-style development corporations as to exactly what they have to include. The likelihood, it is fair to say, is that they would, because part of the objective of a development corporation generally is to bring the development function and the planning function for a particular area together to speed up development. In practice—I hope that this will reassure my right hon. Friend—the east London MDC that was proposed for the Olympic park area has been involved an iterative process, with a degree of discussion between the Mayor and the five London boroughs affected. There has been some negotiation, which is probably a mature thing to have in the current circumstances. The upshot is that we now have a proposal to which the Mayor and the London boroughs are satisfied they can sign up. The boroughs accept that they cede some planning power for a period, but now do so by agreement with the Mayor. I think the same process can be achieved in other cases.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
528 c371-2 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Accountability Housing Greater London Greater London Authority Functions Homelessness Landlord and tenant Local government Litter Powers Property transfer Planning Business rates Mayor of London Private rented housing Mayoral development corporations Social rented housing Taxation Tenants' rights Regeneration Security of tenure Arms length management organisations London Development Agency Homes and Communities Agency Tenant Services Authority
Legislation
Localism Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk