Petitions

Friday 26th September 2014

(10 years, 2 months ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Friday 26 September 2014

Development Proposals in Barton (Salford)

Friday 26th September 2014

(10 years, 2 months ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The Petition of residents of Irlam, Cardishead and Barton,
Declares that the Petitioners strongly oppose the proposals of Peel Holdings to build up to 1,400 houses as well as warehouses in the green belt area at Barton (Irlam ward), which is bound by the M62 (North), A57 (South), Manchester City Airport (East) and Irlam (West); and further that the Petitioners believe that Boysnope Golf Course (an excellent leisure facility for the local community) should not be shut down.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons does all in its power to prevent this development proposal from taking place.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Barbara Keeley, Official Report, 9 July 2014; Vol. 584, c. 403 .]
[P001351]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, received 15 September 2014:
The Government’s objectives for the planning system are set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. Relevant policies in the framework will be a material consideration whenever a local authority is working on its local plan or determining a planning application.
For instance, the framework maintains strong protections for the green belt. This Government continue to attach great importance to green belt as a way to prevent sprawl and encroachment on open countryside, and as a vital ‘green lung’ for many communities. The framework makes clear that openness and permanence are essential characteristics of green belt. It also states that inappropriate development should not be permitted there except in very special circumstances.
Green belts are designated by local authorities, not central Government. Alterations to a green belt boundary can be made, but only in exceptional circumstances, using the local plan process. This is for the local authority to propose, as part of the local plan process. By ending regional housing strategies and the ‘top-down’ pressure they exerted on local authorities to review the extent of their green belts, this Government strengthened green belt protection: local authorities are now fully responsible. If any conflict of policy or planning priorities arises, it is for the local authority to weigh all the material considerations and decide what is right for the land in question.
Because of the quasi-judicial role of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in the planning system, neither he nor any other Minister may intervene in, or even comment upon, any planning application. It is for local authorities to assess and determine planning proposals, and therefore a strict duty of impartiality is in place.

Development proposals on land off Lightwood Road (Stoke on Trent)

Friday 26th September 2014

(10 years, 2 months ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The Petition of residents of Lightwood, in Stoke on Trent,
Declares that the Petitioners are deeply concerned by proposals for a residential development on land off Lightwood Road, which the Petitioners believe the infrastructure of the local area cannot support and would destroy a large area of green-belt land, despite more appropriate areas of land being available in the city.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Department for Communities and Local Government to intervene in this matter at an early stage to ensure a more suitable site is found for any development and any application submitted for a development on this particular piece of land is rejected.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Robert Flello, Official Report, 16 July 2014; Vol. 584, c. 975 .]
[P001372]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, received 15 September 2014:
The Secretary of State has a quasi-judicial role in the planning system, and cannot comment on the merits or otherwise of any planning proposal which might come within his jurisdiction at some future date.
The Government’s objectives for the planning system are set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. Relevant policies in the framework will be a material consideration whenever a local authority is working on its local plan or determining a planning application.
For instance, the framework maintains strong protections for the green belt. This Government continue to attach great importance to green belt as a way to prevent sprawl and encroachment on open countryside, and as a vital ‘green lung’ for many communities. The framework makes clear that openness and permanence are essential characteristics of green belt. It also states that inappropriate development should not be permitted there except in very special circumstances.
Green belts are designated by local authorities, not central Government. Alterations to a green belt boundary can be made, but only in exceptional circumstances, using the local plan process. This is for the local authority to propose, as part of the local plan process. By ending regional housing strategies and the ‘top-down’ pressure they exerted on local authorities to review the extent of their green belts, this Government strengthened green belt protection: local authorities are now fully responsible. If any conflict of policy or planning priorities arises, it is for the local authority to weigh all the material considerations and decide what is right for the land in question.
It is understood that while pre-application discussions have taken place with Stoke-on-Trent city council with regard to proposed residential development off Lightwood Road, no planning application has been submitted. It would be for the city council to consider any application that may yet be made in the first instance. However, in the event that the city council is minded to approve green belt development on the scale proposed, it would be required to refer the application to the Secretary of State under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) Direction 2009. The purpose of the direction is to give the Secretary of State an opportunity consider whether to exercise his call-in powers under section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 taking into account the written ministerial statement on call in. Views expressed by local residents and other relevant planning matters would be taken into account as part of this process.

Human rights in Sri Lanka

Friday 26th September 2014

(10 years, 2 months ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The Petition of residents of Harrow West,
Declares that it has been reported that violent attacks on Muslims in the southern Sri Lanka town of Aluthgama beginning on 15 June resulted in the death of four Muslims, and injured more than 80, with many homes and businesses destroyed; further that the Petitioners believe that it is of particular concern that eyewitnesses have reported that the police stood by and refused to intervene during the violence; and further that international human rights organisations have called on the Sri Lankan authorities to fully investigate the attacks and identify those who incited the violence.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons takes action to raise concerns regarding the violent attacks on Muslims with the Sri Lankan authorities.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Mr Gareth Thomas, Official Report, 22 July 2014; Vol. 584, c. 1357 .]
[P001380]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, received 17 September 2014:
I thank the petitioners for raising this important issue in the House of Commons.
The British Government remain concerned at the recent attacks against minority religious groups in Sri Lanka, as my noble Friend, the former senior Minister of State, Baroness Warsi, made clear in Parliament on 2 July. Our high commissioner to Sri Lanka has raised our concerns with the Sri Lankan authorities over sectarian violence and tensions. We have urged the Sri Lankan authorities to take early action to promote peaceful co-existence between all communities, noting the importance of ensuring any acts of violence, intimidation or threats are thoroughly investigated and those responsible brought to justice. Following the violence, Sri Lankan Justice Minister and leader of the Sri Lankan Muslim Congress told the media that he was “outraged” that the “law and order machinery completely failed”.
The Sri Lankan President committed to bring to justice those responsible for incidents in Aluthgama. However, despite media reports of 124 arrests following the violence, we understand that no convictions have taken place, and that those taken into custody have subsequently been released. There are similar reports of impunity for those responsible for ad hoc crimes against members of religious minorities.
On 7 July, the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Devon (Mr Swire), Minister with responsibility for South Asia, met members of the Sri Lankan Muslim community resident in the UK whose family and friends were directly affected by the violence in order to discuss their concerns. On 18 July, officials met with the Sri Lankan high commissioner to the UK and urged the Sri Lankan Government to take action to address sectarian tensions, including by outlawing hate speech. The EU delegation has also released a statement in agreement with EU Heads of Mission in Sri Lanka condemning the violence and has called on the Sri Lankan Government to uphold law and order.
The UK was a main co-sponsor of a UN Human Rights Council resolution passed on 27 March which establishes an international investigation into allegations of violations of international law on both sides of Sri Lanka’s conflict. The resolution also expresses alarm at the significant surge in attacks against members of religious minorities in Sri Lanka, and calls upon the Sri Lankan Government to end continuing incidents of human rights violations and investigate all alleged attacks on members of religious minority groups and places of worship.
We hope that the Sri Lankan Government will as promised work to ensure that these events are comprehensively investigated and that those responsible are prosecuted. We will continue to urge the Sri Lankan Government to take action to prevent further attacks on minority religious groups, and promote enduring peace and reconciliation between all communities in Sri Lanka. We believe that this would help ensure Sri Lanka reaches its enormous potential as a strong and prosperous nation.