---

National Planning Policy Framework

I am sorry, but I do not have enough time. On the presumption in favour of sustainable development, the debate has focused on the term ““development”” rather than the term ““sustainable””. Some good points were made, both in our debate and in the representations we received, about alternative ways of approaching this issue and, as my right hon. Friend said, we are bearing them all in mind. However, let me quote from a 1949 planning circular:"““In cases where no serious issue is involved, and where the authority can produce no sufficient reason for refusal, the presumption should be in favour of granting the application.””" Things have moved on since then, and we have a plan-led system, but the presumption in favour of sustainable development that we propose will strengthen that plan-led system, not undermine it. I have already commented on the duty to co-operate. The right hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich cannot be in the Chamber now, but he gave some statistics, and I want to put on the record that home ownership fell to its lowest rate since 1990 during the 13 years of the Labour Government, and that they managed to combine that reduction with a 440,000 fall in the number of social and affordable homes. Regardless of what the planning system delivered, the Labour Government certainly did not deliver. Several Members emphasised the importance of bringing empty homes back into use, and the Government agree. We have set aside £100 million to fund a programme to achieve that, and we are also about to launch a consultation on other measures that can help. I welcome the broad support this will receive in the House. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (Joan Walley) said the planning system must be consistent with the Government's other aims. She referred to the national resources White Paper and the work of the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, but we should also mention the work being done by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Treasury to generate growth. The planning system must reflect both the priorities of the Government and the priorities of local communities. This debate is about how we can get that balance right. This debate has been a small but significant part of the important process of building a planning system of which we can be proud—a system that supports growth and change where that is needed to create jobs and homes, that creates health and prosperity for all communities, and that enhances and preserves our country's unique natural and built environment. To respond to another point that was made in our debate, that includes 20th century buildings. We must establish a planning system that leaves future generations admiring our foresight, not condemning our selfishness. I believe the framework we have produced can do exactly that, and I urge the House to support the motion. Question put and agreed to. Resolved,"That this House has considered the matter of the National Planning Policy Framework."