Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 31 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Localism Bill.


Localism Bill

My Lords, we have added our names to this amendment, for reasons which I will try to explain. As I understand the Government's position, this provision is meant not to change the current position—they may confirm or deny this—but to clarify it, as the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, said. The problem in seeking to clarify it, for some of us at least, is that they have unbalanced it and made it difficult. The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, advanced the point that, as drafted, the ““just because”” was the get-out but I contend that if you have to ignore anything that the decision-maker has previously done with a view to a matter, directly or indirectly, there is not much else that that decision-maker could have done which could then be the subject of a challenge on predetermination.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c1036 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Compulsory purchase Councillors Conduct Council tax Fees and charges Land Greater London EU law Fines Infrastructure Increases Fire and rescue services Local government Motor vehicles Litter Planning Business rates Referendums Parish and town councils Local plans Mayoral development corporations Standards Sustainable development Social rented housing Tenants Rescue services Homes and Communities Agency Infrastructure Planning Commission Tenant Services Authority Petitions
Legislation
Localism Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk