Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 17 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Localism Bill.
Localism Bill
My Lords, I think that my noble friend realised that when she started to speak. Some things become automatic as the evening goes on. I support my noble friend, who has made a very powerful case, as she has done on previous occasions. I thought that I might be able to say tonight that the Lady at the Dispatch Box doth protest too much, but I suppose that Earls can protest too much as well. I find that as this debate goes on, the hole that the Government are digging is getting deeper and deeper. The position is not being improved by further re-emphasis. Can you have further re-emphasis? I think that we have got to that stage now—we are up to about three lots of emphasis. By adding this amendment, which says the same thing again, I become more and more concerned. I do not want to repeat points that my noble friend Lady Parminter has made. However, the clause must mean something. It must mean something not otherwise provided for. I find it quite puzzling that the Government take the view that they need to use primary legislation to bring the matter, in the words of the noble Earl at the last stage, "““quickly to the attention of concerned parties””.—[Official Report, 20/7/11; col. 1420.]" I really do not believe that concerned parties need primary legislation to have this and the answer to it brought to their attention. The noble Earl told the House he thought that it would always be helpful, but it is not the practice, for legal advice to be shared. I asked innocently—it was not intended to be disingenuous, but probably sounded it—if we could have sight of the legal advice. I do not want this to sound ungrateful, but what we heard from the legal advice was not helpful, having got to this stage. We did not hear argument; we heard assertion. I am sure that it was not unsupported, but what was shared with the House was simply assertion. Finally, the noble Earl talked of this certainly doing no harm. My fear is that it will do harm because it must be interpreted as meaning something that has not been the case hitherto. I support my noble friend.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 731 c127-8
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Appeals Compulsory purchase Advertising Construction Equality Housing Finance Land Infrastructure Green belt Local government Planning permission Nuisance Planning Natural gas Public consultation Public expenditure Referendums Railways Property development Parish and town councils Local plans Sustainable development Travellers Regional spatial strategies Affordable housing Infrastructure Planning Commission Community infrastructure levy Village greens
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:36:47 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_773816
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_773816
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_773816