All 5 Petitions debates in the Commons on 27th Nov 2023


Thu 23rd Nov 2023

House of Commons (63) - Commons Chamber (46) / Written Statements (5) / Petitions (5) / General Committees (3) / Westminster Hall (2) / Ministerial Corrections (2)

House of Lords (18) - Lords Chamber (18)


Tue 28th Nov 2023
Share Page

Petitions

Monday 27th November 2023

(5 months, 3 weeks ago)

Petitions
Share Debate
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Monday 27 November 2023
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page

Road closures in South Northamptonshire

Monday 27th November 2023

(5 months, 3 weeks ago)

Petitions
Share Debate
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of residents of South Northamptonshire,
Declares that there have been recent, uncoordinated road closures at very short notice with poor signage on the M1 at J15, J15A, A508, A5, A43, B4525, A422 and many other B and C roads; notes that residents have contributed to many planning consultations in recent years on developments such as HS2, SEGRO Logistics Park Northampton and the unwelcome warehousing proposals on the AL sites; further declares that South Northamptonshire has taken an excessive amount of new development where local interests have been overlooked, in favour of the national interest.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to require better coordination between stakeholders, including developers, National Highways and local councils, when closing roads in order to relieve local residents of their misery.
And the petitioners remain, etc.
[P002878]
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page

Development proposals at 21 High Trees Avenue

Monday 27th November 2023

(5 months, 3 weeks ago)

Petitions
Share Debate
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of residents of the United Kingdom,
Declares that the development proposal at 21 High Trees Avenue, Bournemouth under planning application 7-2022-212-10 B did not properly consider residential concerns; notes that the development’s height, impact on surface water, appearance, impact on parking and interference with residents was not properly considered during initial planning and at the Planning Inspectorate appeal by the developer.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to consider the concerns of the petitioners and continue to take into account these concerns if a challenge to the Planning Inspectorate is made within the 6-week window now that the developer’s appeal has been rejected.—[Presented by Mr Tobias Ellwood, Official Report, 25 October 2023; Vol. 738, c. 938.]
[P002868]
Observations from the Minister for Housing (Lee Rowley):
The planning inspector’s appeal decision on behalf of the Secretary of State was issued on 6 October 2023, including reasons for the decision. The inspector dismissed the appeal and refused planning permission.
The appeal decision and reasons are available on the Planning Inspectorate’s website at: Reference: APP/V1260/W/23/3315861 (planninginspectorate.gov.uk).
The decision can only be challenged by application to the High Court based on an error of law. Should such a challenge occur, the Government will consider the legal basis for the challenge before deciding how to defend the decision in the High Court.
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page

Southbourne Crossroads Car Park

Monday 27th November 2023

(5 months, 3 weeks ago)

Petitions
Share Debate
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of residents of the United Kingdom,
Declares that the proposed development of Southbourne Crossroads Car Park in Bournemouth into a series of residential properties would have a detrimental impact on the local community and Bournemouth’s capacity to accommodate increasing tourist numbers; notes that the proposed development was objected to at a local planning level under planning application 7-2021-28119 & 7-2022-28119A and then passed a review from the Planning Inspectorate under the appeals S78/2022/7409 & NON/2022/7408A.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to take into account the concerns of the large volume of petitioners from Bournemouth East who object to the development of Southbourne Crossroads Car Park and take immediate action to intervene in reviewing the Planning Inspectorates decision to overturn the Local Planning Authority’s original decision.
And the petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Mr Tobias Ellwood, Official Report, 26 October 2023; Vol. 738, c. 992.]
[P002869]
Observations from the Minister for Housing (Lee Rowley):
The planning inspector’s appeal decision on behalf of the Secretary of State was issued on 3 March 2023, including reasons for the decision. Having considered all the evidence, including representations from the local community, the inspector allowed the appeal and granted planning permission.
The appeal decisions and reasons are available on the Planning Inspectorate’s website at: Reference: APP/V1260/W/22/3302066 (planninginspectorate.gov.uk).
Unless they are quashed by the High Court, which these decisions have not been, appeal decisions are the final decision on planning applications. There is no further review or appeal mechanism available.
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page

The Kytes Regeneration Project

Monday 27th November 2023

(5 months, 3 weeks ago)

Petitions
Share Debate
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of residents of the United Kingdom,
Declares that the protection to house veterans with disabilities at Kytes Drive has been removed; further that a legally binding covenant should be included into the Kytes Regeneration Project to ensure that new homes to be built will continue to only house veterans, those with disability and the elderly, and their families.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to encourage Anchor Hanover to engage with the council and include a legally binding agreement ensuring that Kytes Estate includes purpose-built and well-maintained rented accommodation to house people over the age of 55, those with disabilities, and veterans, and their families.
And the petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Dean Russell, Official Report, 23 October 2023; Vol. 738, c. 698.]
[P002865]
Observations from the Minister for Housing (Lee Rowley):
The Government recognise how crucial supported housing is to those who need it, including people with disabilities.
To ensure that those who have put their life on the line for their country are not disadvantaged in accessing social housing, we changed the law so that those serving in the armed forces, as well as former service personnel with urgent housing needs, are always given “additional preference” for social housing.
More broadly, the national planning policy framework makes clear that local authorities should assess the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community and reflect this in planning policies.
It is for housing associations, as independent private sector organisations, to make their own commercial decisions. They must, however, comply with the standards set by the independent regulator of social housing. This includes the tenant involvement and empowerment standard, which requires landlords to provide their tenants with the opportunity to influence and be involved in decisions that affect them.
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page