Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Newton of Braintree (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 30 June 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Localism Bill.


Localism Bill

My Lords, I apologise to my noble friend but tempted again I have been—on this occasion just to show how even-handed I am—to join in a little bit with the noble Lords, Lord Beecham and Lord McKenzie, with due apologies to my noble friend Lord Jenkin. It is the third arm of this that worries me most. It says, "““any other person whom the authority considers to have an interest which is likely to be affected by any steps that the authority may take to give effect to the result of the referendum””." It is not just airports. Major commercial developments, for example, have effects over a wide area. Leaving aside Stansted, about which I know a good deal, and which would certainly be said to have effects over 30, 40, 50 or 100 or more miles, Lakeside at Thurrock has had effects on shopping centres all over Essex. It is unimaginable that the local authority would really have to consult the people of Thurrock, Chelmsford, Colchester, Braintree and Brentwood—to name the Secretary of State’s constituency and indeed that of the noble Baroness, Lady Smith. We need some caution before going down the path scripted in this amendment. That is all I would say. There may be merit in the purpose but the wording needs very careful consideration.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c1931 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Community development Costs Council tax Increases Local government Planning Public consultation Publicity Referendums Parish and town councils Petitions
Legislation
Localism Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk