Commons Chamber

Monday 24th March 2025

(began 3 weeks, 1 day ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
14:34
None Portrait None
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.
14:35
14:36
None Portrait Oral questions: Defence
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I I would I would like I would like to I would like to start
14:36
None Portrait Q1. What steps he is taking to improve housing for military personnel and their families. (903339)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like to start with questions. Secretary of State for
14:36
14:37
14:37
14:37
14:38
John Healey Portrait Rt Hon John Healey MP, The Secretary of State for Defence (Rawmarsh and Conisbrough, Labour)
-
-
If the honourable gentleman would like to write to me with the specifics, I will certainly look into that. But he set out for the House some of the nature of neglect and decline we have seen in our Armed Forces housing for so long. And the bind that governments have been in the past, without the power or control, to do the upgrade and make the plans for wholesale renewal for the future. That is what our housing review will fix.

You cannot fix these deep-seated problems overnight but we are determined to do better than we have done in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

past. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can the Secretary of State reassure forces' Secretary of State reassure forces' families in North Durham that the government is ending the failed paging over the cracks approach the previous Conservative government had and is instead taking action to deliver new high quality family homes for our service personnel over the years to come?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the years to come? I can indeed, Mr Speaker. He and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I can indeed, Mr Speaker. He and I stood on a manifesto which we were elected as a government to end the elected as a government to end the scandal of forces family homes. The buyback that we have put in place now is the start to deliver on that promise for army and other forces' families. And to deliver as we are on a number of fronts for defence.
14:40
14:41
14:42
14:42
14:43
14:43
14:44
14:44
14:45
14:45
14:46
14:47
14:47
14:48
14:49
None Portrait Q3. What steps he is taking to ensure that veterans receive adequate support after leaving the armed forces. (903341)
-

Question number three Mr Speaker.
14:49
14:49
14:50
14:51
14:51
14:52
14:52
14:53
14:53
14:54
14:54
14:55
14:56
14:56
14:56
14:57
14:58
14:58
14:59
15:00
15:01
15:01
15:02
15:03
15:03
15:04
15:04
15:05
15:05
15:06
15:06
15:07
15:07
15:08
15:09
15:09
15:09
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:12
15:13
15:13
15:13
15:14
15:15
15:15
15:15
15:16
15:16
15:16
15:17
15:17
15:18
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:19
None Portrait Q14. What steps his Department is taking to help prepare cadets for potential careers in the armed forces. (903353)
-

Number 14 Mr Speaker.
15:19
15:20
15:20
15:21
None Portrait Q15. What steps he is taking to ensure small and medium enterprises are able to participate in defence procurement contracts. (903354)
-

Number 15 Mr Speaker.
15:21
15:21
15:22
15:22
15:23
15:23
None Portrait Topical questions: Defence
-

We now come to topicals.
15:23
15:24
15:25
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:34
15:35
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:37
15:38
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:41
15:41
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:43
15:43
None Portrait Ministerial statement: Heathrow disruption
-

15:43
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
Right, we now come to the statement, Minister for transport. wish to make a statement regarding the power outage caused by a substation fire that impacted Heathrow airport operations on Friday, 21 March. I would like to begin by acknowledging the disruption to everyone affected by this incident. Many homes, schools and businesses temporarily lost power. Some families had to evacuate their homes. And many thousands of had their travel plans impacted. I also want to thank the firefighters and emergency responders who worked in very difficult conditions to put the fire out.

As well as Heathrow, National Grid, and all other public services involved, who worked so hard to get power back on and people back travelling again. This was an unprecedented event and we must learn any and all lessons we can to ensure it does not re-occur in future. Let me begin by setting out what we know about the cause of the incident. A large fire broke out at the substation, at 11:30 PM, on Thursday, 20 March and was brought under control the following day.

Due to the impact, Heathrow airport announced, at 4:30 AM on Friday, that it would close until midnight that day. Power was restored to domestic customers in a matter of hours. After the operator of the local distribution network, S SEM, re-disputed power through other parts of the network. By comparison, Heathrow is one of the country's biggest consumers of electricity. It requires as much power as a small city. What we know is there was an unprecedented outage and that it wasn't the result of a single point of failure on the electricity transition or distribution system.

The feed from Northside substation is one of three supply points to Heathrow. And the fire caused exceptional damage that took the whole substation out of service. The other supply points continued supplying to Heathrow airport Heathrow's view is that the supply was insufficient to ensure the safe and secure ongoing operation of all systems across the whole of the airport. He proceeded to reconfigure it internal electricity network to enable the resumption of full operations utilising the two other external supply points.

This required hundreds of systems to be safely powered down and then safely powered up with extensive testing. The airport has a range of backup generators and uninterruptible power supplies including diesel generators, to provide power to essential systems, to enable them to safely land planes. These backup systems ensure the safety and security systems and protocols were maintained at all times, but they were never designed to support full operation of the whole airport. By 1230 on Friday afternoon, Heathrow began restarting systems, to ensure they were safely operating full stop by 4 PM, the airport was 100% confident that all systems were safely operating across the whole network, and announced that some flights would be able to restart that day.

The first flights from about 6 PM were so-called positioning flights which were to get aircraft and crew to the right places to resume normal operations the following day. This was then followed by flights diverted to UK and non-UK airports, to allow passengers to be repatriated, and a small number of outbound long-haul flights. Since Saturday, Heathrow has been fully operational with over 250,000 passengers able to fly to and from the airport on Saturday. Due to knock-on impact of the event, continued to be some delays and cancellations over the weekend.

Overall, the impact of Heathrow's closure led to over 1300 flights and more than 200,000 passengers having their flights cancelled or diverted on Friday, and a further 110 cancelled on Saturday. The government is acutely aware of the need to ensure that passengers are well looked after and their consumer rights are protected. This is why UK law ensures that airlines must provide passengers with a refund within seven days, or to be rerouted to their destination under the same conditions. We are closely monitoring to ensure that passengers are properly supported.

To support the recovery, my department temporarily lifted restrictions on overnight flights to ease congestion. Heathrow and airlines also added extra capacity into the system to help affected passengers. We also allowed rail tickets to be used flexibly to help passengers who are not able to use their original tickets. Regarding the cause of the fire, the Metropolitan police confirmed that the fire is not believed to be suspicious. However, due to the location of the substation and the impact this incident has had on Critical National Infrastructure, the Metropolitan police's Counter Terrorism Command leading inquiries into this matter.

This is due to the specialist resource and capabilities within that command which can assist in progressing this investigation at pace to help minimise disruption and identify the cause. It would not be appropriate to comment further whilst these investigations continue, but we will of course update the house once it is appropriate to do so. Mr Speaker, whilst it is positive that electricity supplies were restored quickly, there will of course be learning to ensure we avoid such incidents from re-occurring. That is why on Saturday the energy secretary working with Ofgem commissioned the independent national energy systems operating NES to urgently investigate this incident.

It will seek to understand any wider lessons to be learnt for energy resilience for Critical National Infrastructure. NESO have been asked to report back to DESNZ within six weeks. In addition Heathrow has asked Ruth Kelly, former secretary of state for transport and independent member of Heathrow's board to undertake a review of its internal resilience. The Kelly Review will analyse the robustness and execution of Heathrow's crisis management plans, the airport's response, and how it covered the operation. While colleagues across the house will appreciate that we do not yet know everything there is to know about this incident, I will try to answer questions from honourable members with as much detail as possible based on the latest information I have at my disposal.

I commend this statement to Taos.
15:51
Gareth Bacon Portrait Gareth Bacon MP (Orpington, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Secretary of State. to thank the secretary of state for her statement and for advanced sight of it. I would also like to join her in extending my gratitude to the firefighters who responded so swiftly to the incident, I would like to extend my supervision everyone affected by the disruption and to place on record my thanks to all those at Heathrow who works diligently to ensure the airport came back online over the weekend. The loss of power in the Heathrow area caused a significant disruption to thousands of travellers and countless businesses.

Heathrow Airport is one of the world's busiest airport and Europe's busiest air hub and was scheduled to handle 1051 flights on Friday carrying up to 291,000 passengers. However, the fire at a nearby electrical substation. Planes to be directed to other nearby airports. With many long-haul flights returning to their place of departure. The financial cost is expected to total tens of millions of pounds, and significant question marks over the airports vulnerability to further future incidents. I would like to ask the Secretary of State to confirm that she will remain engaged with Heathrow, the airlines and other key stakeholders throughout this period to minimise the impact on passengers.

Turning to the government's response I note that the Secretary of State for energy who I'm pleased to seethis afternoon has instructed the National Energy System Operator to investigate this incident. It is crucial that the NESO investigation limits are clear and objective assessment of the circumstances and the U.K.'s broader energy resilience. I would ask that the government keep the house informed as this investigation develops. I also note that the secretary of state for transport will be closely monitoring this. She is right to do so.

While I trust that she will share the conclusions drawn from the report of the house I would ask to provide specific assurance that she would indeed do so. Focusing on the details of this incident, it is evident that it raises significant concerns about the resilience of Heathrow Airport and in particular critical infrastructure in general. Regarding Heathrow's resilience, important questions are raised about why the area was dependent on a single electrical substation that proved so vulnerable. I understand from media reports and from the Secretary of State statement this afternoon that whilst there were additional substations capable of powering the airport in doing so it required the reconfiguring of all terminals.

The secular state believe this setup is appropriate for the country's largest airport? What assessment she made regarding the power supply resilience of other major UK airports? With regards to the resilience of our Critical National Infrastructure, this episode underlines the urgent need to ensure that the critical infra structure is safeguarded against accidental incidents and deliberate acts of sabotage by malign actors. The house will recall that when President Putin launched his illegal invasion of Ukraine local energy markets are faced immense disruption. Posing the most significant threat to European energy since the 1970s.

Despite this upheaval, Britain's energy prices remain broadly stable but only because the government of the day took decisive action to protect businesses and households with price spikes as far as possible, and this came at a significant financial cost. However, this event at Heathrow reminds us that true energy security depends not only on price stability but also on the physical safety of energy infrastructure. Given the crucial role of airports to our economy, we must remain vigilant. In light of that I must ask the Secretary of State, what discussions she has had with her honourable Friend the energy secretary to ensure the energy supply to major airports remain secure full stop what is the timeline for the Kelly Review? Will the findings be made publicly available? She engage with colleagues across government departments to assess and mitigate the risks posed by malicious actors who will undoubtedly have taken note of this weekend's events.

And finally, what specific steps will she take to strengthen the resilience of our Critical National

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Infrastructure? Thank you Mr Speaker. I am
15:55
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Mr Speaker. I am grateful to the honourable gentlemen for the tone of his comments. Let me for the tone of his comments. Let me assure him and other members of this House that I will do everything I can to keep him updated, and I will continue the engagement that I have had with Heathrow since the incident first became known to me. I spoke to the chief executive of Heathrow on Friday morning, I spoke again to the Chief Executive of Heathrow today.

If there is anything that my officials can do to assist his front bench in understanding this very serious issue, I would be very willing to facilitate any meetings that he may wish to have. With regard to the internal investigation that London Heathrow board have commissioned Ruth Kelly to do, as he knows, I have asked to see a copy of that report, and assuming that I have the permission of Heathrow to share it more broadly, then I will be happy to share the content with be happy to share the content with him and the house.

He asks me about whether I am content and confident with the setup for airport power supplies. I should just say I'm not going to become an armchair electrical engineer. I do want to see the reports that have been commissioned by the airport, and that the Secretary of State for energy has commissioned through NESO. We are also conducting via the Cabinet Office a resilience review of Critical National Infrastructure, and I can assure him that we will be looking at any and all of the issues that this incident raises in those reviews.

I did speak with the Secretary of State for energy on Friday evening, and I also assure him that I will continue to engage across government on any of the issues that this incident raises.
15:57
15:59
15:59
Paul Kohler Portrait Mr Paul Kohler MP (Wimbledon, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Liberal Democrats Spokesperson. statement and for advanced sight of it. I express my gratitude to the firefighters and other members and workers who fought the fire and the airport and airline and in the face of the catastrophic systems failure. What happened is clearly a rare occurrence and raises a number of significant questions about the security and management of our Critical National Infrastructure. Must I'm pleased to hear that currently no foul play is suspected, the event has reeled on abilities in our national security, which may be exploited in the future by terrorists and hostile state actors.

It is vital that lessons are learnt to ensure incidents like this do not happen again. I welcome that there will be a full investigation into what has happened. It is concerning the failure of a single piece of infrastructure has taken down the entire airport. Heathrow is connected to three substations, whilst two were impacted, the third was running and had enough capacity, thought to be around 72 MW to power the whole of Heathrow. It is evident Heathrow's power setup could not swiftly configured to allow the third station to be used.

We need to understand why and whether this is appropriate for the future. What Heathrow claims it is normal for airports not have security backup capacity to power their entire needs, other industries that require even more power than Heathrow such as data centres take more robust steps to ensure there are sufficient backup systems to counter such failures. Should our key international transport hub have the same safeguards? We must not forget those whose journeys were disrupted. It is estimated that over 200,000 passengers have been impacted.

But under current regulations most of these will not be eligible for compensation. Can I ask the secretary of state three questions. One, what impact if any of this incident have on the Government's Plan for Jobs and not Heathrow? Can the national grid infrastructure cope with 1/3 runway, although the airport become more prone to failure? Sadly, does she believe that UK airports should be taking steps to increase their backup capacity, to ensure an incident like this doesn't happen again? Thirdly, does she believe the current regulations of compensation are
16:02
16:03
16:03
16:04
16:05
16:05
16:06
16:06
16:07
16:08
16:09
16:09
16:09
16:10
16:10
16:11
16:11
16:12
16:12
16:13
16:14
16:14
16:14
16:14
16:15
16:16
16:17
16:17
16:18
16:19
16:19
16:19
16:20
16:21
16:22
16:22
16:23
16:23
16:24
16:24
16:25
16:25
16:25
16:26
16:26
16:27
16:27
16:27
16:28
16:29
16:29
16:29
16:30
16:30
16:31
16:31
16:31
16:32
16:33
None Portrait Legislation: Planning and Infrastructure Bill: 2nd reading
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The reasoned amendments in the name of Gideon Amos has not been selected. Minister to move the second reading.
16:33
Angela Rayner Portrait Rt Hon Angela Rayner MP, The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Ashton-under-Lyne, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

second reading. Thank you. I beg to move that this bill be read a second time. It this bill be read a second time. It is time to get Britain building again. This is what working people expect of this government and it is what we will deliver. Bringing an infrastructure bill is critical to achieving economic growth, higher living standards and more secure future for our country. This is our plan for change in action. Action to plan for change in action.

Action to build 1.5 Action to build 1.5 million homes in this parliament and a fast track of 150 major infrastructure projects, more than one decided over the 14 years under the last government. It is also key to making Britain a clean energy superpower, bringing down bills for working people and securing our energy supply in a more uncertain world. Make no mistake, this bill will transform the lives of working people and Britain's prospects for years to come. It is hugely ambitious and rightly so because everywhere I go, I hear the same frustrations.

We just can't build anything anymore. We definitely need more homes and more development. For too long, the answer has always been no, and that is choking off growth, leaving working people worse off and leaving Britain behind. Trains that don't work, roads are clogged and not enough homes being built. I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. Can I just say that none of my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I just say that none of my constituents are saying that we don't need any more homes or want any more homes. They just want to be any more homes. They just want to be consulted. They want homes in the consulted. They want homes in the right place in the right numbers, and they want their voice listened and they want their voice listened to through a local plan, not ignored

**** Possible New Speaker ****

as the current government are doing. I say to the member that it is this government that has brought forward mandatory local plans. It was his government that didn't do that. For too long, we have left home ownership collapsing, homelessness soaring, over 160,000 children in Tempe accommodation, a country that simply isn't working. The time it takes to secure planning permission for major projects has almost doubled in the last decade, more than four years. It is slower and more costly to build infrastructure in France and Italy.

And no new reservoir has been built for over 30 years. There are for over 30 years. There are countless examples like the critical new road improvement scheme for Norwich which would account jobs and speed up journeys yet it was held up for two years by unsuccessful legal challenges. And the ridiculous situation where 139 desperately needed houses because of around over the speed of balls in neighbouring cricket clubs. The result has been Hugh homes built, lower productivity and growth.

For 40 years, this country has been crying out for a woman with the will to change that, and successive Tory Prime Minister's promise that change, but when the bold action was demanded, they too

**** Possible New Speaker ****

backbenchers. Will she take on developers and make sure they build planning

**** Possible New Speaker ****

make sure they build planning permissions they have already got? I thank the member but he will know that we are already making changes to the national framework, with the new homes accelerator which is all ready providing thousands of is all ready providing thousands of homes and this bill is about building on those powers to make sure that we get Britain building. It was his government that didn't It was his government that didn't build the houses in the infrastructure that we desperately need and they were too timid to face down the vested interest, and it is this Labour government is on the side of the builders and not the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

blockers, and we say no more. In the 1.5 million houses, it is important we see that, but part of the infrastructure is the charging the infrastructure is the charging systems. Many people I speak to say they are not getting one because they don't have enough charging points. The governments bill points. The governments bill indicates there will be more, but is that something she might share with the Minister in Northern Ireland, the Minister in Northern Ireland, and secondly, I understand as well that some of the standard accessibility requirements do not meet the standards.

The Minister

**** Possible New Speaker ****

meet the standards. The Minister confirmed that we changed as well? I thank my friend for his intervention. The bill will streamline the approval of street works needed for the installation of EV charge points and removing the need for licensing where words are capable to be authorised by permits because we recognise that people do need this critical infrastructure as part of these reforms. It is why we are taking more action in eight months and the party opposite managed in 14 years.

We have reverse the damaging changes made by the Tories to the national policy framework and bought greenbelt into the 21st-century, ending the de facto ban on new onshore wind and we are supporting authorities with an additional 300 planning officers, and just this month, we set out reforms to put growth at the heart of the statutory consultees system. Many would have said stop there, allow the reforms to bed in, but Britain cannot form to wait. We have been held back by two long with governments without the bill to drive the change, so today, this landmark infrastructure bill goes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

even further and faster. And I congratulate my friend on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I congratulate my friend on championing affordable and social housing and the expansion of that? We have travellers who have been discriminated against by the Conservatives 14 years, so there is Conservatives 14 years, so there is no assessment of need. They are not in the planning permission. Can we rectify that in this bill so that we rectify that in this bill so that we have a level playing field for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

everyone in need of housing? We are working with local authorities, and within this bill, there is also provision for strategic authorities as well so that we can look at where we have states and make sure that people are states and make sure that people are accommodated and it is for local authorities to be able to do that. But it starts with a quicker and more certain system for big ticket more certain system for big ticket infrastructure projects. It will slice through the bureaucracy and speed up transport projects.

It will speed up transport projects. It will overhaul how government decisions and projects can be challenged, so meritless cases will only have one rather than three attempts at a legal challenge, stopping cases from being dragged endlessly and needlessly through the courts.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Somewhere in the system, knocking around, there is a press release that says that the ceiling project that says that the ceiling project for example, National Grid ceiling for example, National Grid ceiling project being obstructed by too many project being obstructed by too many objections. The reason it is being objected to is because the National objected to is because the National Grid wants to build a 90 foot high converter station the size of five football pitches on the marches in Kent.

We have to have the right to object to that kind of project.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I say that there isn't a lot of rights to object and we are strengthening the processes and strengthening the processes and clarifying them as part of this bill. As I said, quicker and more bill. As I said, quicker and more certain systems for infrastructure projects. It will slice through projects. It will slice through those and speed up transport projects, but what it won't do is projects, but what it won't do is allow cases to have three attempts at a legal challenge.

It. Cases for at a legal challenge. It. Cases for being dragged endlessly and needlessly through the courts, and it begins to strip away the unnecessary consultation requirements that do nothing to improve applications and engage communities do slow down the delivery of infrastructure that will benefit communities in the future. It creates greater flexibility so projects can go through the most appropriate and faster planning

**** Possible New Speaker ****

route. When there are a number of infrastructure projects in one area, infrastructure projects in one area, that has a huge impact on that area, and in my constituency, we are and in my constituency, we are looking at having an interchange of looking at having an interchange of major solar plants, so can she give reassurance as to how their voice could be heard under this project could be heard under this project and can she reassure us that the cumulative effect of these national projects which are not present in local plans will be taken into consideration before decisions are taken?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We will be consulting as part of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We will be consulting as part of the bill in terms of the draft that we have put forward, but we want to see better quality engagement as see better quality engagement as part of this. It is why the changes will ensure that everyone works together early on and that we have proportionate decisions that are proportionate decisions that are also faster. We will make sure that governments infrastructure policies governments infrastructure policies are updated at least every five years, but the measures in this bill are not the limit of our ambitions.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

are not the limit of our ambitions. She is writing the process of which instruction needs to be built, but if I come back to expansion, I would be grateful if you could set out in writing the exact process under these legislation. In addition to that, those who would be affected by compulsory purchase order are now going to be removed as consultees at

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the application stage? I won't get into the details of any particular process or planning, but what I will say is that this infrastructure bill is about better infrastructure bill is about better and quality engagement and statutory and quality engagement and statutory consultees, those will be engaged and will continue to be engaged, but what we don't want to see is major what we don't want to see is major infrastructure projects continually being blocked for years and years and years. People been speaking and years.

People been speaking about some of these projects for decades and we still haven't got the connectivity that we desperately need, but we are opening to strengthening it and will give serious consideration to proposals that further our objectives, and we will continue to engage with colleagues across the house as well as business and communities on what might be done about existing requirements that are not working as they should, and we are clear that where once the answer was always no, to get Britain building, to drive growth and deliver opportunity, the answer must now be yes.

The bill is also geared towards another crucial pledge, building the new homes we need. We will boost housebuilding in England by streamlining planning decisions. I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I warmly welcome steps being taken to streamline the system and get more in the bill which includes get more in the bill which includes affordable housing. With the deputy Minister agree with me that this Minister agree with me that this would go some way to helping the 160,000 stuck in a temp 160,000 stuck in a temp

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for that intervention

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for that intervention and bringing it back to why we are here and why we are in this mess in the first place. Over Christmas, will got to see our family and friends. I was thinking about the 60,000 children who are in temporary accommodation and thinking there is one thing that during the general election campaign that I was very clear on is that we have to move forward to build homes for people who desperately need them. Every single one of those -- behind every single one of those statistics is an opportunity that is not being realised and that is one of our missions for this government, to strengthen that.

I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

By my calculation, if the government is going to build 1.5 government is going to build 1.5 million homes by the end of this parliament, we are nine months into parliament, we are nine months into the first year of this government and the government should have built 25,000 by now. Can she confirm how

**** Possible New Speaker ****

25,000 by now. Can she confirm how many have been built? This is just an example of what mass the previous government left us in. Housebuilding is going in. Housebuilding is going backwards. The figures they backwards. The figures they promised... In the first few months of us getting into power, we changed the National Planning Policy Framework. We have been consulting, we've been working with industry, we've had the New Homes Accelerator, More Affordable Homes Programme, 2 million homes announced today.

We will boost housebuilding in England by streamlining planning decisions, introducing the national scheme of delegation which sets out which type of application should be determined by officers and which by planning committee. Local committee oversight isn't -- is crucial. Decisions might be taken -- must be taken at the right level to get Britain building. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank her for giving way. She mentioned the importance of getting people out of temporary accommodation, something which I wholly support. Many families suffer wholly support. Many families suffer from overcrowding and living in unsuitable conditions. My inbox is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

full of these issues. My honourable friend makes a very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend makes a very important point because not only is this government inherited a dire situation in terms of housebuilding situation in terms of housebuilding and that's why we are going to turn the tide and build the 1.5 million homes. We've also seen homelessness levels rise. We are going to end section 21 evictions. We will keep our promise. There is so much wrong with the housing system. This government is starting to turn the tide on that. This is one crucial step in the overall picture that this government is taking to improve circumstances where people, whether they want to buy a home, whether they are in a home or in a private rented a situation.

Turning back to the planning committees, we will bring in new controls over the size of planning committees, increasing the pace and quality of decision- making while maintaining robust debate. And we are introducing mandatory training for planning committee members to improve their expertise while allowing councils to set their own planning fees to cover their costs. With a promise that this money is reinvested back into

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the system to help speed it up. I'm very grateful to her for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to her for giving way. I welcome a lot of what this bill is doing. It's spinning up this bill is doing. It's spinning up the planning system. As a chancer, I was practice in planning. That is was practice in planning. That is needed if we are going to get more houses will. One area I have houses will. One area I have concerned about is what she is talking about just now. Of local people feel overwritten by the planning system, they're going to feel very hard done by.

Otherwise, if we override local people, we might just as well have a nationally directed planning system, rather than local planning system. Will she carefully think about that balance?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable gentleman and recognise his expertise in this and recognise his expertise in this area. I think he is absolutely right. There has to be a balance and that is why we set it out in the bill were there is controversial schemes, they will still go to full planning committees. I'm sure the planning committees. I'm sure the gentleman would recognise that as well. Where local planners would be able to do some elaboration, where able to do some elaboration, where we set out the rules clearly, we can we set out the rules clearly, we can make the process better with mandatory training for those on planning committees as well.

I think we will get a better result from those ranges. I hope the honourable member will continue to engage with us in that vein. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anki. Can I welcome -- thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anki. Can I welcome -- thank you. Can I welcome the infrastructure project that will be paid for by this bill? Also, more importantly, this bill? Also, more importantly, we need more builders and that's why we need more builders and that's why the 600 million announced is very, the 600 million announced is very, very welcome. Can I suggest that Rochdale's College which is training Rochdale's College which is training a brilliant construction workers as a part of the project?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As my Honourable friend alludes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As my Honourable friend alludes to, 10 colleges of excellence were announced. This is part of our announced. This is part of our making work pay. Giving young people making work pay. Giving young people opportunities. It will be fantastic and I hope the honourable member will be engaged in that process and my colleagues in government will have heard that. Is another Greater have heard that. Is another Greater Manchester MP, I feel that Greater Manchester should be part of that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

process. Madam Deputy Speaker... I will give way. Just to pick up on some of the comments about lockers. I pickup comments about lockers. I pickup comments in my constituency and the comments about nimbys blocking comments about nimbys blocking building is not true. People recognise the need for homes but what they worry about is what they worry about is infrastructure. This bill does not include mandatory infrastructure targets and that is why communities are so sceptical about their ability to get GPs appointments at the to get GPs appointments at the moment with additional homes and in, they will struggle even more in the future.

I can we reassure them that those needs will be met in the future?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, let me be clear. I don't call people of this country the call people of this country the blockers. I think the honourable member makes an important point about infrastructure. People often about infrastructure. People often say the infrastructure is not there. This bill streamlines infrastructure. I think it go some way towards doing the work. We have way towards doing the work. We have to do a lot of other things like to do a lot of other things like we've done with section 106.

Often, we did not get the benefit. People wiggled out of there obligations. I wiggled out of there obligations. I appreciate the tone of what the honourable member is saying and this government is going to make sure that we build the houses people want, where they want them, with consultation and with the critical infrastructure that they need. And at the same time, we will unlock plans for housing and infrastructure by reforming the compulsory purchase process, ensuring that important projects which deliver public and if it's like many more social and affordable homes, are given the green light and that compensation paid to landowners is not excessive.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Deputy Crime Minister for giving way. -- Prime Minister for giving way. -- Prime Minister. Can I ask her to clarify Minister. Can I ask her to clarify whether it will also apply to wider projects for community benefits, such as playing fields. My constituency has got a playing field constituency has got a playing field that has lain derelict for decades. There is a huge demand for these playing fields. The community wants to be able to access it.

Will she reassure me that the home value changes will apply much more broadly than just affordable housing?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I hope the honourable member continues to engage because we do want to make sure we can go as white as we possibly can. We want to get the land that is needed to get the houses we desperately need. We are also doing work within the devolution bill which will be coming devolution bill which will be coming devolution bill which will be coming round around some of the points that the honourable member raises. We are also strengthening element corporations to make it easier to corporations to make it easier to deliver the housing projects we need.

These corporations deliver previous generations of towns and this Labour government is building on a post-war legacy by giving them enhanced powers to help deliver our next generation of new towns. These will be communities built with local people in mind. There will be Affordable Housing Commission GP surgeries, public transport that working people expect and need. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank her for giving way. Actually, we have a mutual passion, I know that Deputy Prime Minister is I know that Deputy Prime Minister is a great fan of the work that his a great fan of the work that his Majesty the King does in terms of the built environment and making the built environment and making sure there is a very high quality in terms of design. One of the concerns that I think a lot of people have is that I think a lot of people have is seeing the quality of design eroded and same design in Kent as there is and same design in Kent as there is in Staffordshire.

Would the Deputy Prime Minister look at what could be done to enhance design codes because it feels like there has been an erosion of this, not an enhancement of it? of it?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, it reminds me of our time when we use the spa at the dispatch box but I'm glad I'm on the site box but I'm glad I'm on the site I beg to differ. I think is absolutely right about design and we are looking at that in our new towns. He is right that his Majesty towns. He is right that his Majesty also feels very passionately about this. I think everybody does contribute as. Nobody wants to live in another home.

Design is really in another home. Design is really important. It's different in different places. Yorkshire is different to Manchester. Making sure that as part of the process is always crucial is important but not preventing us from going forward. That is why we clarified some of the issues around beautiful that was holding a. I want to pressure Honourable members across the sites that we expect safe homes, we expect beautiful homes and we expect homes that are fit for the future in terms of renewables and energy efficiency.

To meet our net zero ambitions and drive growth, the bill will also speed up approval for clean energy projects. Some projects currently face weights or -- waits of over 10 years. Another legacy of Tory years. Another legacy of Tory failure. We are refuse -- replacing the first come first served approach. Our reforms will protect households from the rollercoaster of foreign fossil fuel markets and usher in a new area of energy independence were despots like Putin can no longer have their boot on the nation's truth.

Of Britain's electricity grid needs a first 21st-century overhaul to connect the right power and the right places -- Britain's electricity grid needs a 21st-century overhaul to collect -- connect to the right power and the right places. With those living within 500 m of new pylons getting up to £250 a year of their electricity bill because we recognise the service of these communities by hosting the infrastructure that will lower everyone's energy bills.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for giving way. She makes an important point about access to energy that all of our communities energy that all of our communities require and I think it is require and I think it is particularly prominent in all of our minds at a time when we recognise that food security as national security, that we don't fall into a security, that we don't fall into a trap of displacing high quality agricultural land and in effect agricultural land and in effect energy becomes a cash crop.

Can the deputy premiers to give assurance of deputy premiers to give assurance of house that we do not risk falling into this trap and that we won't displace high quality agricultural

**** Possible New Speaker ****

land for energy in the first instance? Well, I can reassure and I gave

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I can reassure and I gave him two chances. I can reassure the honourable member that we will honourable member that we will protect high quality agricultural protect high quality agricultural land. Farmers have used land in various different ways throughout the decades and generations. We do protect high quality agricultural protect high quality agricultural land. Finally, I want to turn to the land. Finally, I want to turn to the measures in the bill on development and nature recovery. We have some incredibly important habitats and species in this country and the government could not have been more clear in our manifesto that we are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

committed to improving outcomes for nature. I will give way. I thank her for giving way and congratulate her on fantastic speech congratulate her on fantastic speech and a great piece of legislation and a great piece of legislation which both turbochargers are plan to restore nature and build homes that restore nature and build homes that we need. Can I ask more about how this bill could restore our precious chalk streams?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This bill is about how we can do nature recovery and protect nature. We think this bill is a win-win. Under the previous government, we had all sorts of problems that were holding up and we tried to work with the government. They would not work with us when they were in government and that is why they are on that side of the house and we are on this side of the house and we are building. Sure it's a shared goal by all members across this house that we want to improve outcomes for nature but I'm also confident that no one here thinks a system -- the system is working well.

Any several that results in hundred million pounds but on is not good. They were pounds but on is not good. They were So, thanks to a collaboratively effort with organisations across development and the environmental sectors, our bill sets out a better way. That is a win-win for development and for nature. It establishes a nature restoration fund that will allow developers to make a single payment to discharge their environmental obligations, and to crack down on the building homes and infrastructure projects that we desperately need so that we can crack on.

That money will then be used by Natural England to take the action needed, not just to avoid further decline in our natural world

**** Possible New Speaker ****

but to see improvement. It is very reassuring to hear that she is so passionate about that she is so passionate about restoring nature, but how then can she explain why in Walsall, planning she explain why in Walsall, planning permission has been allowed having permission has been allowed having been refused by the local council to allow battery energy storage systems on the greenbelt?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on the greenbelt? I will not comment on individual progress, but we have been very progress, but we have been very clear as were set out in this bill about nature protecting our natural spaces and it is how we will look at neutrality behind us and get Britain building while also stopping the pointless pitting of nature against development.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In North Cumbria, because of the problems caused by the government in not tackling neutrality, we are not tackling neutrality, we are facing a very significant issue with regards to housebuilding, so I very strongly welcome the provisions in this bill on the nature restoration this bill on the nature restoration fund. Can I ask that the Department works with the local authority in the interim to come forward with the interim to come forward with mitigation schemes that will get housebuilding going in North Cumbria in the interim.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

in the interim. I thank my honourable friend for raising this long-standing issue and this government is engaging with the local authority in the area because it is right that for too long, the previous government wasn't listening. In the other place, I remember when I was in opposition, we try to work on these issues and they refused to work with us. This bill is our reform to mark a new area for Britain. We are turning the page on years of defeatism and decline where a country of extraordinary talent and capability have been held back by a system that has been hobbled at every turn.

With these reforms, we are not just putting more money into the pockets of working people and strengthening communities, we are also taking a major step forward to secure our countries future for the long-term. Getting Britain building again, getting growth going and paving the way for national renewal. This is real delivery. It is real change to transform the lives of millions of people for years to come and I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

commend this statement to the house. The question is the Bill be now
17:04
Kevin Hollinrake Portrait Kevin Hollinrake MP (Thirsk and Malton, Conservative)
-
-
read a second time.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I am pleased to leave the response on behalf of the the response on behalf of the opposition. We have interest in the opposition. We have interest in the property sector. We support some of property sector. We support some of the principles which builds on the the principles which builds on the work we undertook while in office, a period which includes the record period for housebuilding in this period for housebuilding in this country. We also highlight our concerns in a number of areas.

Where the bill goes far enough to achieve its goals, the removal of a counsellor's ability to vote on applications, the potentially toxic mix of disproportionately large areas, the Trojan horse of the removal of any protections for villagers, and the move to strategic plans and also, the ambition to build 1.5 million homes. I realise the Secretary of State is quite keen on spotting elephants, but she seems to have missed a huge one in this room, the 1.5 million target is completely undeliverable.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

On chapter 2, subsection 3, it talks about the draft of special development strategies, and it brings in representative bodies of brings in representative bodies of different racial ethnic or average groups, but also different religious groups, but also different religious groups. Isn't there a danger here that we are starting to pit communities one against another? I communities one against another? I wanted to intervene about that. We

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will see how we are enshrining this in legislation. He is right. If something will be looking at this, it is completely inappropriate that certain groups should get prominence or preference over other groups in terms of consultation that might occur during the planning process. The ambition is all well and good, but the government has not yet set out exactly how it will do that. There are many questions about livability in the context of the index which describes one of the biggest monthly full sin housebuilding construction on record, and indeed, the joint report of the home-building Federation and the National Housing Federation was said that she would fall foul of her target.

The government has not yet set out how many social reforms homes that we deliver all measures that would put in place to allow first time buyers onto the ladder, particularly when they have scrapped help to buy and stamp duty discounts which helped 1

**** Possible New Speaker ****

million young people to buy their first home. Does my friend agree with me that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does my friend agree with me that housing targets mean very little if housing targets mean very little if the government doesn't get a grip of immigration which is causing massive demands on housing?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

demands on housing? He is right to raise that point. A decrease in population in this country is driving part of the country is driving part of the reason why we are seeing rising need for housing, but also in terms of template accommodation, all of which template accommodation, all of which impact on that system. He is right to bring that up.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member talks about missed targets and affordability. In 2010, the first of 16 housing ministers under the previous ministers under the previous Conservative government will be claimed that the government would reduce and improve affordability of reduce and improve affordability of housing overall, but over the period housing overall, but over the period that his government was in power, that his government was in power, affordability reduced from 6.852 7.7 in terms of median house prices to wages. Could he explain that failure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to the house? He fails to acknowledge there are a few housing ministers under Labour's biggest tenure, but he makes an interesting point, very important point which I am happy to answer to. We want to build more houses to tackle the overall affordability problems, and as I say, in terms of social housing, during that period of time, as well as delivering 2.5 million homes, we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

homes. The point I was making was about outcomes and the previous government committed to improve affordability and then failed to do so. Could he explain why that is the case?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

explain why that is the case? There are some problems in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There are some problems in the case. Of course we agreed that the supply and demand is part of this supply and demand is part of this equation. It is not the only part of the equation so we support the ambition to deliver more homes. There is a context of that within the overall framework of a higher target. The government must also reflect on the fact that all of the sector is an important part of the economy, Italy represents a 6% of GDP.

Growth in the other 94% has been killed stone dead by the wrecking balls of the Chancellor and the prime minister. The fastest- growing economy in the G7, the Chancellor recklessly tracked talk to the economy for six months before hitting it with 70 before hitting it with 70 million of tax and borrowing. And if that wasn't bad enough, the Deputy Prime Minister is bringing forward the employment rights bill which will kill, wonderful, and all the union supporters will applaud them for it.

It will kill tens if not thousands of businesses and potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs across our country.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have heard comments about planning permissions that have been granted but not built, and every developer that I have spoken to over developer that I have spoken to over the course of this Parliament has said that there is one cause for said that there is one cause for that, and that is because it has taken so long to get planning permission which this bill has been looking to fix, but also, the time may have been looking to get may have been looking to get planning permission, Liz Truss crashed the economy, and as a consequence, we had an inflation crisis and costs skyrocketed, so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

crisis and costs skyrocketed, so before he comments on our economic record, will he apologise for his? It is nonsense. According to a monthly survey, a monthly survey carried out by the Institute of directors, business in this country has collapsed since they took over. A high of +5 in July 2024 has collapsed to a COVID level low of - 65, all inflicted on this country by her government. The complete absence of any business experience in the Cabinet 's own daughter this place having killed economic growth in most of the productive economy.

The government is now reminiscent of a gambler at the end of a disastrous casino night. They are sticking everything on a lastgasp gamble on the property market. The period for 2013 to 2023 saw the highest sustained level of homes of the last 50 years. Even surpassing the levels seen in the 1970s. Since 2010, we have seen a million new homes and 750,000 affordable homes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does my friend not think there is a real challenge in terms of encouraging more people to get homes encouraging more people to get homes with the stamp duty imposed on them, and one of the important reforms would be if the premise to could encourage the Chancellor to relook encourage the Chancellor to relook at this so it is not so expensive to buy that new home?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

buy that new home? He is right. What has the prime and got against first-time buyers? We have helped 1 million first-time buyers to get on that housing ladder through help to buy and through through help to buy and through stamp duties. Both of which have been scrapped by this government.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wonder whether he might like to reflect on the fact that while help to buy did help some people purchase to buy did help some people purchase a new home, many others were priced a new home, many others were priced out of it, and also, the exorbitant bonuses that were paid to the huge housebuilding companies that housebuilding companies that benefited, and they were the ones that benefited the most from help to buy. I don't disagree that there buy. I don't disagree that there were some flaws in the scheme.

Nevertheless, around 340,000 people Nevertheless, around 340,000 people made it onto the ladder through that process. People in my constituency and his. We do recognise the need to go further which is why we commissioned the work on speeding up planning and national infrastructure projects, delivery and the review on accelerating energy infrastructure. We are grateful to them for their work. Their recommendations were made by them and others with the bill before us, its benefits have been significantly oversold. For example, on the infrastructure process, measures to reduce decision times are welcome, but we believe that considerations should be given to removing certain critical projects such as airports, reservoirs, power stations and schemes from the judicial review process altogether.

The nature of the levy and environmental plans should be delivered by Natural England and are potentially welcome if they successfully allow developers to discharge the requirements of the habitats regulations. However, there are key questions. What incentives are there for Natural England to set levies that are proportionate to the impact of the environment, or will they just become another tax and another deterrent to building? Happy to give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I say that the work that was done by his side of the house was done by his side of the house was welcome, particularly in respect of welcome, particularly in respect of its views on incorporating nature into the structure of the bill, but it was unsuccessful. He will have it was unsuccessful. He will have heard my honourable friend talk about a win-win for nature, so can about a win-win for nature, so can he give the house assurance that his side of the house will be backing side of the house will be backing measures such as swift bricks, the cavity nesting birds that have no other place in this country and are declining at a great rate, to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

incorporate those as a mandatory We will support measures that we think will be successful. When he think will be successful. When he brings up work done by the previous Parliament, somewhere unsuccessful. Including, of course, are solution Including, of course, are solution for neutrality, which was banned by his party. That particular measure his party. That particular measure is considered negligible. We want to ensure that any other measures put ensure that any other measures put into place by Natural England are not negligible.

I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I very much agree with what my right honourable friend has said. Does he agree that there is more that could be done to replace chalk that could be done to replace chalk stream habitats, particularly in the south of England. Does he agree with me that what we could do is me that what we could do is designate these chalk stream habitats and ensure that the government specifies clearly what permissions are available there.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

permissions are available there. Other questions, our National England sufficiently resourced to England sufficiently resourced to carry out their work? Have the government taken into account the incredible delays of the environmental delivery plans? Is it not the case that the habitats regulations remain in place beneath this new system? If their development does not ensure the overall improvement test for each identified environmental feature, as referenced in clause 55, the system won't apply and the developer will still need to build those back channels.

It might set the bar even higher for requiring a net gain for that species and that is if an EVP covers one element of environmental impact but not others. The developer might need to pay into the levy and build the back tunnel. Has the government also considered changes to the environment act which this legislation is subject to? We believe the Minister's reflections on this. It will take at least two to three years from Royal Assent for these EVP is to have meaningful effect.

-- EDPs. There is also concern regarding whether the route will deliver. It has been stated that the government's approach means that natural capital assets will be destroyed immediately and it could take decades for any improvement. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will give way. Very grateful to my Honourable friend. As he rightly pointed out, friend. As he rightly pointed out, there are certain circumstances that there are certain circumstances that nature been -- can be compensated for. But landscape can never be replaced. Once it's gone, it can. I wonder if he agrees that there wonder if he agrees that there should be scope in this bill for protected landscapes, to make sure that development in those areas is both appropriate but doesn't permanently damage our precious landscapes for future generations

**** Possible New Speaker ****

question mark He raises a very important point. Constituencies like mine and his don't seem to have that considered don't seem to have that considered or catered for within the housing targets, particularly the new ones targets, particularly the new ones were sitting in front of us. Are very keen to discuss with them how we might address that. On planning, we are very concerned about the we are very concerned about the national scheme of delegation which will remove councillors right to vote on individual planning applications.

And if the Secretary of State does not believe that is the case, I suggest she reads clause 46 of this legislation. This is particularly extraordinary considering the Housing Minister said when in opposition in a debate in this House in June, 2021, that the previous government was protecting the rights of communities to object to individual planning application. Clearly, it is not doing that. He is doing the opposite. He should be clear with the public about that. Sooner or later, that fact will hit home.

And, later, that fact will hit home. And, of course, it is also a fact that 14 cabinet ministers, including the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and the Health Secretary campaigned to block housing developments in their own constituencies. What hypocrisy.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I've often found that the right of counsel to insist that the matter goes to the planning committee, goes to the planning committee, rather than be determined by officers, actually leads to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

officers, actually leads to the application going through were petty officers would have refused it. The vast majority of applications

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The vast majority of applications are consented by planning committees. It's the wrong thing to committees. It's the wrong thing to remove that right to do that. They must be honest with the public that that is exactly what is happening

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that is exactly what is happening here. I will give way. I thank the Shadow Minister for giving way in this matter. Many are facing councils -- many are facing councils that are being abolished by this government. There will be no democratic accountability at council level now with the planning committees either. It is removing protection for communities like my. Huge amounts of greenbelt are being turned into grey belt. Can my friend understand the concerns of communities like mine about what proposals like this one mean?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

intervention. I am concerned about the point he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am concerned about the point he raised. Talking about abolishing a layer of government. They are layer of government. They are actually introducing another layer of government, the strategic committees, which will have the committees, which will have the ability to push those areas into

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rural areas. I thank him for giving way. On the point of the environment, the point of the environment, national parks like the South Downs National Park which is rightly protected from building, means that when housing targets are imposed on us, all the housing has to go in the bits of East Hampshire that are not part of the national park, increasing pressures on what is essentially greenbelt but not in the park. Would it not be better if it was taken from the totality and the national park is excluded from the figures?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I agree we should look at what areas are fair to include. The areas are fair to include. The removal of powers from councillors were only become apparent to many residents when they see that green residents when they see that green notice on their nearby Telegraph poll and contact their local councillor to express concern only councillor to express concern only to be told, I'm sorry, I no longer have the power to ask for the application to be considered and voted on by a planning committee.

The LG itself strongly opposes these changes. It says, the meritocratic role of councillors and decision- makers is the backbone of the English planning system and this should not be diminished. We also have concerns about the imposition of strategic planning and this will be used as a vehicle to force rural authorities to absorb housing need. This is a concern for many rural areas given the disproportionately high increase in targets for rural locations. I will in a second. She has increased the national target for housebuilding by 50%.

You would expect what an average -- or an average -- and avid resident might expect... The average targets for areas are up by 17% while rural areas have increased by 150 -- 115%. London's target is down by 15%. Birmingham is done by 38%. Venture down 58%. Rural areas are up by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

100%, some areas almost 500%. This is a prime example of where

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This is a prime example of where this is happening. Leicester City where infrastructure is an plenty brain fields is being reduced by 13 one where infrastructure is an one where infrastructure is an plenty brain fields is being reduced plenty brain fields is being reduced by 13 131% -- 31%. Rural areas are going up. That sticks in the throat going up. That sticks in the throat of people who want to see houses when these areas are suffering. Does when these areas are suffering.

Does he agree that this is not right.It's totally unfair in my view. It is gerrymandering.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want to bring up this exact same point. Housing target is going same point. Housing target is going to be a staggering -- going up by a to be a staggering -- going up by a staggering 27%. Does my right honourable friend except that it is not just the rural communities that not just the rural communities that have been affected, it's those that are peripheral to the cities?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

are peripheral to the cities? I thank her for that intervention. It's right to say that she is right to express her concerns. She expect everyone to carry a fair share of the extra housing. That is not what is happening. She should have a word with the House of Commons Library and check those numbers I'd. Many councillors and residents alike will councillors and residents alike will be shocked. Plans do not have to be consistent, merely have regard to it.

Can the Secretary of State confirm whether this status will be changed? There is nothing in their plans about adequate resourcing or having process reforms for the planning Inspectorate, which is clearly a key part of the system. And why has she scrapped all the work we did on design codes so that we move away from identikit housing and build more beautifully? We would like to see more ambitious requirements for sites to be made available for small builders and for self build.

Currently, 10% requirement on local authorities. We would like to see 25% allocation as required by the Federation of Master Builders. We would also like to see Homes England remit extended.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for giving way. On the point of local plans, does he recognise that only one third of recognise that only one third of local authorities have up-to-date local plans under this government, which is hindering communities in which is hindering communities in shaping what they want to see, as is being proposed? Ceramic I agree.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

being proposed? Ceramic I agree. I agree. And compulsory purchase orders, there are very understandable concerns that this is an extension of the government's attacks on farmers. Countryside Alliance said that giving councils more powers to reduce the value of land is a step too far, especially in the context of the inheritance tax fiasco. The Deputy Prime Minister and her colleagues should heed the words of NFU vice president Rachel Hallas. This bill comes at a time when the UK farming industry is under immense pressure due to the loss of rent payments, extreme weather and the impact of the inheritance tax.

Farmers must be consulted every step of the way. Can she confirm that that there will be the case? On grey belt, great belt which was sold to the public as if you abandoned garage forecourt is now exposed as a Trojan horse we predicted it would be. Although not directly part of this will, it clearly to interact directly with it. It has been described as a deathknell for the greenbelt due to the removal of the parts, definitions and protections of villages so that villages can now merge together or into nearby towns.

In conclusion, we will not oppose the passage of this bill this evening but we will seek to amend it in ways that do not undermine the ambition to accelerate the delivery of new homes, but to make sure there are checks and balances that tax communities, rural areas, farmers, the environment and deliver well- designed, affordable homes for everyone, not least those on lower incomes and first time buyers. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before I call the next speaker, there are a region of 60 members seeking to get in it so after the seeking to get in it so after the frontbench speeches have been completed, there will be a five minute time limit.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a pleasure to follow the honourable Shadow Secretary of honourable Shadow Secretary of State. The Secretary of State is State. The Secretary of State is right. It is an ambitious. 97 clauses, six schedules. I want to
17:30
Valerie Vaz Portrait Rt Hon Valerie Vaz MP (Walsall and Bloxwich, Labour)
-
-
clauses, six schedules. I want to focus on part two, the planning decisions, because I think it is important for constituents. Having important for constituents. Having The Deputy Prime Minister touched on consultation. Could she ensure that some local authorities count abstentions in favour while others don't, so could the Minister look at the way consultations apply in a standard basis across the whole country? I hope that we will be based on principles and that should apply whether it is the committee or apply whether it is the committee or the officers.

After some training, there are some committee members who would need a consideration if it hit them in the face. We want to be part of a system that is rule-based, and there is reasoning and an apparent bias that meets the test. This would have said that the relevant decision-maker has taken into account considerations and not take into account irrelevant considerations. But I want to set out five important issues, whether it applies to the officer. If it is going to the officer, they should have taken a site visit.

All votes of the planning permission should be recorded. Many of us know that there are constituents who come to us and they can't tell, so that is a really important part. I know the fees are ring fenced. But documents should be available for members of the public. You cannot see all the documents, and one of the decisions made, we had to find the highways report. There should still be a physical file that members of the public can go and have a look at if they want to.

I hope the ministers will consider term limits for planning, and transparency is one of the most important things. There should be a procedure that is available for everyone. So everyone throughout the country follows the same procedure and it is idea too. We had a and it is idea too. We had a situation once where there was a takeaway, a decision that was made just before the UN and public health said there was no comments. There was no impact on one decision and then changed their minds after speaking to the applicants, so it is a transparency addition to be looked at.

I welcome the strategic sites where there may be some areas in the districts and the combined authorities which are more

**** Possible New Speaker ****

authorities. I thank her for a thorough speech

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank her for a thorough speech for the system and how to speed up for the system and how to speed up decision-making. It is important decision-making. It is important that we have large amounts of land and sometimes there are lengthy delays being built out, and that has delays being built out, and that has a real impact on people trying to find their own house, suggest she agreed that the government is right agreed that the government is right to look at this?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will come to touch on greenbelt, but the important part is that we should not be shut out of any statutory consultation. They and any statutory consultation. They and other consultees must be recorded in the process. Greenbelt should be protected although there are cases protected although there are cases of infill and edges that is of infill and edges that is acceptable. However, I must say that doesn't want to be joined up to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Birmingham. There are many things that the right honourable member and I may disagree on, but when it comes to not wanting Walsall joined up to Birmingham, I think we both agree with that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I do want to raise the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I do want to raise the issue of buy to let, and I hope that the Prime Minister will speak to the Treasury about the fact that buy to let companies have become the let companies have become the largest ingle type business in the UK. Homes are for people to live in. And can I just mention that the And can I just mention that the Frontbench, if they can remember Walter Segal the method house that people vote for themselves in the 1970s, they will have pockets of land, and I know you are looking at me in conclusion.

It should be a system which does not exclude the voices of the constituents. We will have to live with the development. It should be for the common good and for future generations, taking into account the climate crisis. I know the ministerial team are up to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

task. Having a home of your own has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Having a home of your own has crept out of reach of a whole crept out of reach of a whole generation. The emergency fund, in the last five years, 58 children the last five years, 58 children died in Tempe accommodation being died in Tempe accommodation being named as a contributing factor. Most of them were under one years old, so of them were under one years old, so we urgently need to provide more homes which are genuinely affordable. That is why in Somerset, the council building in parts of the county for the first time in a generation, 220 counsellor factors, 100 additional elsewhere.

We are building thousands more homes, new homes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will do. I think my honourable friend for giving way. As a fellow friend for giving way. As a fellow MP, you will be aware that Somerset has had 18,000 homes stuck in the has had 18,000 homes stuck in the planning moratorium now for five planning moratorium now for five years. While some of those have been unlocked, many are still in limbo, but it is meant to fix this impasse, but it is meant to fix this impasse, so does my honourable friend share this concern that the measures in this bill may actually fail to unlock this unless National England is given the resources needed to monitor and enforce the nature of recovery fund.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

My neighbour is absolutely right, and that is why we are the only party putting a manifesto at the front for Natural England and the environment agency to address the challenges she so rightly sits out.
17:38
Gideon Amos Portrait Gideon Amos MP (Taunton and Wellington, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
challenges she so rightly sits out. LibDem has also granted planning permission, 13,000 which remain

**** Possible New Speaker ****

unbuilt in my county alone. What impact does he have under

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What impact does he have under the coalition government had on the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

delivery of affordable housing? One significant increase in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

One significant increase in bringing homes back to the coalition policies promoted by the LibDem ministers, many of the cuts made ministers, many of the cuts made between 2010 and 2024, if you look between 2010 and 2024, if you look at the figures, a far far deeper after 2015, and the record will bear

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that out. If the member is willing to give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If the member is willing to give way, there was not a greater cut in the affordable homes budget at any the affordable homes budget at any point under 2010 and 2024. The larger cut was under the coalition larger cut was under the coalition government which was nearly 70%.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If you look at all departmental, department under this, the cuts were

**** Possible New Speaker ****

far deeper. Might it be that the coalition government was having difficulty building affordable houses because the former chief Treasury said there the former chief Treasury said there was no money left.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

was no money left. The honourable gentleman is right to remind us that the outgoing Labour government for the incoming coalition. We do need to tackle blockages in the system, and if those homes in Somerset have permission and are not being built, we would have eliminated the 10,000+ housing waiting lists in the county.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He has been very generous with his time. He speaks about missions his time. He speaks about missions being granted, and I was part of the planning commission in 2023 for the Victoria House site which has lain Victoria House site which has lain dormant ever since have not been dormant ever since have not been built, and it is a frustration for me every time I cycle past to see that potential not being realised. Disagree that giving councils the Disagree that giving councils the power to take over sites that have permission would be a really important part of delivering homes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that we need? It is as if my friend has read further sections. This is what we need to do to unlock some of those sites. I will make progress. I'm sure the honourable gentleman is being nice to me, but we will put that to the test later on. This is why we welcome the provisions to allow compelling cases and public interest for acquisitions which can and should go ahead on use value, not on the value of the detriment of the public.

That should make a big difference to deliver more social homes. Councillors need to be resourced for those products, and putting out forward, we abolish the Planning Application Fees. I Am Delighted to See That That Is Included in This Bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I Would like to Take This Moment to Congratulate the Heroes within to Congratulate the Heroes within His Party Who Forced Them to Look at His Party Who Forced Them to Look at Building Homes. Many People He Sits on Benches Alongside Were Calling out the Members of This Party Who out the Members of This Party Who Are Trying to Get Them to Do so. One of Which Called Them Fatuous. Building New Homes Is Not Thatcherite but this chamber should

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be supporting it. If you so interested in our debate, please come and join our next party policy. We would be delighted to debate whether our targets should be 150,000 social houses a year, or 300,000. We need both, and that is the conclusion of our very thoughts through an timely conference debate at the time. So I would congratulate the Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister for including that lifting of the cap. And I would also congratulate them on bringing forward strategic planning into the bill and the chambers to national policy measures.

The new nature of recovery funds however would say that I would congratulate them on the plan which would support neutrality were my honourable friend the member for Somerton and Froom pointed out. That is holding back thousands of homes, and I welcome that. But as we welcome that, we also point out that it was very unclear how that restoration levy will work alongside other regimes, and in this respect and many other respects, this bill is short on some of the key principles for the Secretary of State.

It is short on how those powers will be exercised. The bill doesn't just like details but lacks important principles including how that will work with other regimes. Funding the recovery leisure needs to be upfront so that work begins at the beginning straightaway. And we ask the Minister to enshrine on the house of this bill so that, on each side, the development should do no harm. That principle needs to be guaranteed its place at the top of the hierarchy of mitigation when it comes to protecting our environment.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

On energy infrastructure. Would his party support the water

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would his party support the water companies becoming a statutory consultation so that we can ensure consultation so that we can ensure that any new housing, not a litre of extra sewage goes into our rivers?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

extra sewage goes into our rivers? We would support that as we did indeed in the Westminster Hall debates very recently. We should be debates very recently. We should be hearing the voices in the planning system, not shutting them out, and system, not shutting them out, and on energy infrastructure, we welcome support in terms of improving access to the grid, connections are a huge source of delay, delays in transmission which is one of the biggest bottlenecks for renewable energy, but here, if we will unblock that, we need to go further.

All large-scale projects should not just be transmission but should be giving people direct community benefit, whether it is a wind farm, a battery array, power station, those living nearby should benefit whether it is local bills. We support the ambition to frame line projects with exceptions about the points made on taking category three people out of taking category three people out of Who were the big lockers on these projects? It wasn't the local communities, it wasn't the planning profession, it wasn't the councils.

It was ministers who left decisions lying on their desks, racking schedules. Let's not blame people for politicians mistakes in this bill. There are things to welcome -- while there are things to welcome, this bill hits the wrong targets in many areas. There are many Henry VIII clauses giving sweeping powers to the Secretary of State. The democratic deficit is becoming a serious concern in this bill. And for all that, there is an aim at communities when we should be encouraging those communities to deliver the homes we want to see.

I say again racking up omissions get built and we already have a staggering 1.5 million homes in this country without permission want to country without permission want to ensure more homes. It is a use it or lose it, that needs to be the message. Unless we deal with the supply chain issues, the lack of skills, we are going to have even

**** Possible New Speaker ****

more blockers on development. I will give way. I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for giving way. How does he square his support for getting more homes built support for getting more homes built and helping children living in temporary accommodation with his temporary accommodation with his opposition to the new homes in his constituency that he announced online just this month?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

online just this month? I'm actually delighted to be supporting thousands of new homes supporting thousands of new homes across my constituency. The population of my constituency has gone up almost 10% over the last 10 years and have supported thousands of those new homes as have my Liberal Democrat colleagues who sit on the planning committee and voted through all those permissions. If occasionally a smaller development is not right, I would expect him to oppose it in his constituency just as I would in my constituency.

I believe members of the house have done so. By giving more powers to community, community led approach could increase supply. It's time to give councils, for example, the power to and right to buy in areas. You cannot fill the bath in terms of providing council houses and social homes if the plug gets taken out and they are forced to sell them off as they have done over the preceding decades. Also, we want to see control of how many holiday lights are allowed in areas so that homes are not swallowed up for rental to holiday lights which could decrease the supply of affordable housing.

Mandating renewable energy, as my honourable friend the member for Growing our economy, sustaining nature and building homes that are not -- and building homes are not mutually exclusive. There are so many examples of how they can work together. Community led decisions very often bring the best results. To unlock the homes, it's only taking aim at ordinary people stop the government needs to do two key things. First, look the infrastructure. That includes the GPs really, the transport we need, the green spaces, the green infrastructure and the water connections that need to come forward.

Secondly, fund the social homes, fund the social homes that are so surly lacking. A lack of social homes, which since it disappeared, is a large proportion of housing supply. The country has never been able to have supply keep pace with demand ever since those social housing targets fell away. Our target is 150,000. I hope the government will provide a target of its own for social homes. So far, nothing has been said on that. The numbers you could then provide would be unlimited.

The 2000 home development which in supporting in the west of Taunton is shooting taking shape. -- Is taking shape. With many people wanting to see a new GP surgery. Where it is built, we often cannot get GPs to go into surgeries. We want to see a bill which is about communities and about them bleeding and planning and development. And said, this bill as part of a growing trend. One that is taking powers away from local communities. The bill takes a really big step in the direction.

It enables national schemes of delegation that dictate who makes decisions in your local council. Is another Henry VIII clause giving unlimited power to Whitehall to rewrite standing orders and constitutions and councils up and down the country. I cannot possibly sit right with anybody who values our proud tradition of independent local government. Consultation is sidelined elsewhere as well. Sport England will no longer have its voice to protect playing fields. People will be subject to compulsory purchase orders and not have the voice they had before.

If planning communities are the blogger, than its take quick look at the actual figures. Councils approve over 85% of planning applications. Some studies put it even higher. Closer to 90%. Councils of all parties are to 90%. Councils of all parties are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not looking development, they are enabling 90% of permissions to go through. I thank the honourable member for giving way. Would he agree with me giving way. Would he agree with me that the emphasis on removing the powers of planning committees in this bill is by default leading public to believe that public public to believe that public planning committees have been the problem -- that planning committees have been the problem. Whereas they have in making the right decisions and those decisions have been upheld.

I feel it should be put on upheld. I feel it should be put on record that planning committees as a whole and not the problem. There are whole and not the problem. There are a huge amount of issues that we have to deal with but that is not the one.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I come back, as the LGA said, that politicians role as the that politicians role as the backbone of the system. Taking decisions out of their hands is decisions out of their hands is taking decisions out of the hands of local people. You have that level of trust and local knowledge in shaping your times with local councillors. Removing people from the system, removing councillors, it doesn't mean faster planning. It will mean less democratic running.

It will mean people shut out. They lose faith with the system even more. It means even more legal challenges, more people who feel shut out of the system. The bill risks not only slower but worse development. There is another way, of course. Not a bill that shuts people out and shuts them up, silencing voices, failing people and basic services they need. Is said, we should look to the great community developments of the past. From Letchworth to towns like Milton Keynes, right up to award-winning schemes being built often partnership with the public and private sector.

Developments were nature, people and the economy grow together, not in opposition to each other. If we build with the economy and furniture by developing with nature, and for people by developing with people, then we will be building homes, jobs and services our communities want to see, that our country deserves and are environment and planet so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

desperately need. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The origin of Britain's planning The origin of Britain's planning system is is deeply rooted in the policy of post-war Labour government as the National Health Service and as the National Health Service and the welfare state. Like these great labour institutions, it has faced labour institutions, it has faced relentless underfunding, dismantling and attack from the party opposite, which prioritises the rights of which prioritises the rights of which prioritises the rights of wealthy landowners.

So I commend ministers are bringing forward a bill that offers the opportunity to at last get to grips with the appalling mess made of the planning system by the party opposite. After, it was they who allowed over 14,000 ha of our best farmland to be lost to development since 2010. The reality is that we now have substantially more homes per capita than we did 50 years ago. A surplus that has rapidly grown in recent years. Yet, since 1971, house prices in the UK have risen by 3870 %.

Whatever might be said by lobbies, the housing crisis is not a straightforward issue of supply and will not be solved by simply putting more powers in the hand of profiteering developers. Waiting for profiteering developers. Waiting for a market solution to the societal emergency would be an extravagant, would be an exercise in utterly would be an exercise in utterly extravagant futility. I will give way. way.
17:56
Chris Hinchliff Portrait Chris Hinchliff MP (North East Hertfordshire, Labour)
-
-
I thank my honourable friend for giving way. For the last 30 years, successive governments have attempted to deliver affordable housing through the private sector. This has failed. With my honourable friend agree it is time to have a publicly funded council house building programme?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for that intervention and completely agree. What is needed is for the government to deliver a coherent vision for development in this vision for development in this country that matches the clarity and boldness of labours 1947 vision but in democratic control -- putting in democratic control -- putting democratic control and social justice at the heart of the system. justice at the heart of the system. More than 1.2 million homes have not been built.

-- More than 1.2 million homes that have been granted planning permission have not been built. Profits have been maximised. We must introduce financial penalties for land banking to spare on construction and dampen price inflation. Intensely granting -- bunting 10, local people remain stuck on skyhigh waiting list with enormous knock-on for those We must address not just the aggregate quality of building but also the type of homes were providing with a new era of council housing, especially in small towns and villages.

The housing crisis is also about the concentration of land ownership in the hands of the superrich. Have of England is owned by less than 1% of its population and between 1995 and 2022, land value has risen by more than 600% to £7.32 trillion and representing more than 60% of the U.K.'s total network. I welcome this bill's expansion of powers for local authorities to help prevent developers cashing in often inflated land prices at the cost of the taxpayer. We must provide the necessary funding for genuinely affordable homes, linked to local incomes within design communities, benefiting from easy access to all the facilities we need in our daily lives.

Simultaneously, the government must also grasp this opportunity to reshape how councils develop local plans. Empowered councils with well resource planning departments should be able to take an active role to assess the needs of local families, identify appropriate sites and proactively use compulsory purchase orders for genuinely strategic land assembly to meet the needs of their communities. Finally, given the collapse of nature in a country, we must use this legislation to recognise the very real environmental limits on growth. It's high time our planning system ensures that the presumption in favour of sustainable development ceases to act as a presumption in favour of any development whatsoever.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I look forward to working with ministers to advance this legislation and secure the strongest possible bill that restores our role as custodians of the countryside, compels the private sector to deliver and returns the power to meet our housing and infrastructure needs firmly back in Democratic hands.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. South Leicestershire is a small constituency. It already has some of the larger scale developments in any
17:59
Alberto Costa Portrait Alberto Costa MP (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
-
-
the larger scale developments in any part of our country. We've got the second of the new tide in prisons that was recently completed. We've got one of the largest holes in the UK with the quarry. We've got one of the largest UK car auction sites. 25,000 cars at any one point coming in and out. We've got the 4000 home development. We've got the prospect of a new garden village. We are surrounded by logistics parks. We play home to one of Europe's largest logistics parks, currently doubling insights, Mac now Mark.

-- Magna Park. At which point we say we are doing a reasonable share for our country? There are no nimbys in South Leicestershire, we generally support their development. And I generally support the objectives in this bill. But there are one or two areas I would like to raise. And that is the highly controversial proposed development known as Lutterworth East. And I know the Secretary of State cannot refer to specific cases and in particular, this matter is the current subject Must have appropriate numbers of social housing and affordable housing.

The Local Plan that the district council approved, which was in itself approved by the Planning Inspectorate, made clear that large-scale housing developments in my constituency must have 40% affordable homes. In addition to affordable homes. In addition to that, the Lutterworth East proposal promised the people of Lutterworth that there would be no expansion of warehousing as part of Lutterworth East. On the basis that Magna Park is currently doubling in size. So the problem that we have isn't NIMBY's, it isn't a lack of building.

So what is the problem? The problem is that the Local Plan for South Leicestershire is being completely ignored by developers. In completely ignored by developers. In this case, the auditory is that the developer is Leicestershire County Council. It's disgracefully applied to substantially vary the planning permission that it was given in 2020 in 2024 Lutterworth East. Only last December, and it was granted a reduction of 40% affordable housing for Lutterworth East, to 10%. That cannot be in line with the new government's many stated comments about the need for affordable housing and social housing generally.

It flies in the face of everything the secretary of state and her team are saying. It flies in the face of what the Secretary of State herself has said today at the Dispatch Box. So I want to put on record, and I don't expect a response today by the Secretary of State, but I want to put on record that, if she is genuinely serious about wanting more affordable housing in large-scale housing projects, then I would request that the call in is granted.

All that will happen if it is, it will restore Lutterworth East to an appropriate housing development of just under 3000 homes, of which 40% would be affordable. If the Secretary of State does not agree with this call in, I'm afraid you cannot stand that the Dispatch Box and claim that the new government want to see high levels of affordable housing. Because all the developer is doing in this particular case is saying no to affordable housing. So I conclude with my general support for the objectives that the Secretary of State and her team have, for more homes.

South Leicestershire is doing its part, but I do want to put on record once again that if she is a serious about the numbers of social housing and affordable homes that needs to be built, that call in must be granted. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.
18:04
Ruth Cadbury Portrait Ruth Cadbury MP (Brentford and Isleworth, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. I welcome this bill. When I studied for my planning diploma, I learnt for my planning diploma, I learnt that how since the 1947 Planning Act, the power of national strategic policy versus the challenge of local politics in planning approvals waxes and wanes. It felt as though in the last government, national powers over significant relevant decisions almost disappeared. Under the last government, new Housing Development Study, prisons, and more, MPs of the government party effectively pressured the then Secretary of State to refuse these much-needed infrastructure developments.

There infrastructure developments. There has to be a balance. And the national government has to be able to deliver on its national strategies. And this is what this bill does. Specific parts of the bill that I particularly welcome, that it fosters more certainty for Critical National Infrastructure, electricity, so important as we are hearing this morning on the Heathrow statement, clean energy, roads, public transport, water, and sewage. I welcome the certainty of decision-making for planning applications, more effective land assembly through improving the CBO process and bringing back element corporations.

And the return of effective spatial development strategies. This bill will enable the government to reform the planning system to deliver on that growth, new housing, cutting of carbon emissions and climate change resilience that the UK so badly needs. As an MP in London, where buying a home and even renting is adequate for most young people, I welcome the focus of the government on delivering 1.5 million new homes. This bill and the excellent national planning statement enables new housing developer and to no longer be designed with entrenched car dependence.

The bill is an excellent opportunity to ensure that new housing and other development can be concentrated in locations with good public transport. So that schools, shops, health centres, parks, and open spaces are easily reachable without the need to be able to drive. This ensures access for all, drive. This ensures access for all, not only those who have a car. It ensures access to jobs, to education, training, shops, all essential building blocks for growth

**** Possible New Speaker ****

across this country. I thank my constituency neighbour

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my constituency neighbour for giving way. She is making a strong speech. I agree with her strong speech. I agree with her about building where, homes which about building where, homes which are accessible by public transport. Would you agree with me that we should be encouraging the government should be encouraging the government to look at ensuring that where the public sector is selling off land public sector is selling off land and buildings, whether it is disused police stations and fire stations, or other public service sector buildings, they should be allowed to sell those below market value and encouraged to do so in order to enable more affordable and social housing in constituencies like mine and hers where there is just not the land to build on?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She makes a good point but she has to remember due to 15 years of austerity from the public sector, any of those sales were the only way any of those sales were the only way those institutions could deliver the new services that were so badly new services that were so badly needed. The Mayor of London and needed. The Mayor of London and councils like Hounslow are working with this Labour government on several key transport links including the west London orbital including the west London orbital which will unlock many thousands of new homes.

But this bill alone won't unlock the housing and infrastructure projects that this country so urgently needs. So I do ask the Deputy Prime Minister, who is no longer here, but also the housing and planning minister who is, that they also address some other causes of delay and uncertainty that we are currently seeing in the system. Section 106 agreement and CI L on new bus routes must be adequate or timely, and sustainable, so that people are not moving into estates with car dependency.

Two buses a day for maybe a couple of years sometime after homes have been occupied is not building in sustainable transport. Sadly, for new joint public-private development, the Hybrid bills process, as was used by HS2 took years, it still did not deliver the detailed plans which got mired in lengthy legal processes over the detail. The chairman of the national infrastructure commission told our Transport Committee how France and Spain have delivered new high-speed rail in a fraction of the time without being mired in public opposition and legal challenges.

It has taken far too long to deliver even half of the original HS2 project. I hope the government will come up with a more streamlined process for such major national projects. Thirdly I hope the deputy private that will work with the Chancellor on different public- private funding mechanisms that other equivalent economies have long used to develop transport of the structure, social, and affordable housing and other public goods. So that these no longer are held back due to historic Treasury orthodoxies on capital expenditure.

Fourthly, the housing minister will be aware the additional delays that developers are facing because they have planning permission blabbing to late in the gateway two and three of the new Building Safety Act. The legislation itself may not be a problem but that Building Safety Regulator processes certainly are. Development of over 400 homes in my constituency has been stuck for over one year with no certainty as to if and when they go ahead. Obviously my last three-pointer not in the scope of the bill but they are relevant to the aspirations of this Labour government to get Britain building, which this bill will deliver.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. There is no doubt we need new homes. But it is abundantly clear from my casework and from my doorstep conversations in North East conversations in North East Hampshire, as I'm sure many other places as well, the effects of a
18:11
Alex Brewer Portrait Alex Brewer MP (North East Hampshire, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
places as well, the effects of a warming planet and many years of neglected infrastructure are wreaking havoc on our communities. In order to stop the damage, we must look after nature as we build and ensure a well thought out approach to our public services so they can be an effective integration between new homes and local environments. It is frustrating to say the least to see Labour removing the space for local decision-making and consent. Local people know their area.

In North East Hampshire, Chalk Streams Bill close to our heart but also far too close to our sewage outlets. There are only around 200 chalk streams left in the world and to my constituency. The home to iconic species including kingfisher and salmon. Despite this they have not been protected in last year alone been protected in last year alone chalk streams insured 40,000 hours of sewage discharges will stop they are under threat not just from sewage but from irresponsible developers promised protection and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

abandon those promises after planning permission is granted. I strongly support what she is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I strongly support what she is saying and strongly support the specific protection for chalk specific protection for chalk streams. Plus you feel this bill goes far enough on it all it needs specific legislation to preserve what are these beautiful and almost what are these beautiful and almost unique things that we have in this country?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country? I thank him for intervention. To ensure that development is approached effectively and approached effectively and sustainably there must be legislation to protect chalk streams. The government should use the bill to expand the list of irreplaceable habitats that are severely threatened and include chalk streams within that. Mitigation schemes won't help these unique habitats, they need protection. Unbelievably this is the second bill in six months which the government could have used to protect our precious chalk streams as the Water Special Measures Bill

**** Possible New Speaker ****

also failed to mention these specifically. I thank my honourable friend for giving way. Like her I have two chalk streams in my constituency and I wonder if she agrees that making I wonder if she agrees that making water companies statutory consultees on the future will ensure you get on the future will ensure you get the infrastructure that is required so we don't just see more pollution going into our chalk streams?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going into our chalk streams? I thank him. I completely agree.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him. I completely agree. The government should be more ambitious in its bill to ensure Building Regulations and nature friendly development to provide sustainable and healthy housing.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable Lady for way. I agree with her. Britain is way. I agree with her. Britain is one of the most nature depleted countries in all of Europe. Would she agreed with Greenpeace, with she agreed with Greenpeace, with Green Alliance and with RSPB who say that developers and nature go hand

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that developers and nature go hand in hand to allow both to thrive and that this bill achieves that? I thank him for intervention. I actually agree that nature and building should go hand in hand. And building should go hand in hand. And I hope that this bill will start to achieve that. We know that good green and sustainable design work to everyone concerned. Sufficient insulation for example in homes prevent heat loss, reduces builds and reduces carbon emissions. So energy production and proper flood protection is our other obvious examples where investment upfront pays dividends down the line.

A great example in North East Hampshire is hearts District Council offices. Since the installation of solar panels on the council office roof, a phenomenal 57,000 kWh of electricity is generated each year. Imagine if we put solar panels on every new house built? Major issues like flooding and drainage are currently plaguing many areas up and down the country. In my constituency, and surrounding areas are frequently flooded due to blocked drains and surface water that cannot drain away effectively after heavy rainfall.

The fire station even had to raise all their electoral sockets higher up the wall because the flooding has been so frequent. I local businesses are struggling to get sufficient insurance. The bill should include a binding commitment to the land use framework. This would help determine when land-use change can occur to find the optimal balance between food production and ecosystem services such as flood risk, climate So are coming into the point new houses. We need them and we need them fast. This is a once-in-a- lifetime opportunity to ensure that new homes are properly fit for the future.

They must be built in the right place, with the right infrastructure and with proper consideration to food security, biodiversity and carbon footprint. Communities don't mind new homes but people also want to get a GP appointment, they want to have an NHS dentist, a robust service and to drive down a road that doesn't have any potholes. There is an opportunity to be ambitious here and it is being missed. I urge the government to be bolder and strive for planning that is as committed to the environment as it is to housing, that is as committed to infrastructure as it is to housing.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

And that is as committed to local communities as it is to housing. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would also like to thank the people from across government and the Department of art so hard to
18:17
Chris Curtis Portrait Chris Curtis MP (Milton Keynes North, Labour)
-
-
the Department of art so hard to pull this bill together quite quickly and I would also like to thank the honourable member from Taunton and Wellington. In politics, we also like to talk about our own stories and how they have impacted us. I sat on these benches and heard the Education Secretary talk about how education has helped her in her life or the Health Secretary talk about his interactions with the NHS when he had his cancer diagnosis. It's one of the things that drives him to fix our health service today.

And I think about was important to my life, in fact, what I believe is most significant to most young people's lives, it is having a decent home, surrounded by a decent community. Milton Keynes, my hometown, was founded the last time this country was actually building 300,000 homes a year for people. The pioneers who pushed so hard to get the place built meant my parents were able to bring me up and my brother in a spacious home with our own back garden, giving us the security and stability needed for the best start in life.

It meant I could play safely and green spaces that had access to excellent local amenities and that my family could live affordably with a good quality of life. This is the kind of opportunity that every child in Britain deserves. It's great to see legislation that will finally begin to remove the barriers to building new homes that this country so desperately needs. And with the changes and development corporations and CEOs, we might also see the new towns in this country so desperately needs as well.

The proposals to planning committees will also play a key role in ensuring that much- needed development don't get stuck in unnecessary bureaucracy and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

political gridlock. I will give way. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way. Does he agree with me that local people will still have a role in developing local plans and complicated planning applications in complicated planning applications in many of them? Some of today's debate has been scaremongering. has been scaremongering.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

has been scaremongering. I agree. The on housing, we also need to recognise that our failure to build vital infrastructure in Britain is leaving our country vulnerable. Our energy security, the foundations of our national security, depend on having infrastructure to support a modern, productive economy. We have failed to build the transport needed to get people moving efficiently. We have failed to build the energy infrastructure needed to reduce our dependence on volatile foreign oil and gas. We have and built a single reservoir in decades meaning we lack the water supply needed in the face of climate change.

Of course I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way. A number of members on that side of the house keep using that side of the house keep using reservoirs as an example of why this reservoirs as an example of why this legislation is going through and the legislation is going through and the fact that a reservoir has not been built for a number of years. Under current legislation, reservoir is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

being built in my constituency so is not a great example to use, is that? I thank him for that intervention. I just note the amount intervention. I just note the amount of time that has taken. It would be nice if someone on the opposite benches acknowledged the barriers they constantly put in the way of building. It's one of the reasons we are in the situation we are in now. Our national security is only as strong as economic security. Sure, we should be investing in defence but we are only able to do so if we have a strong economy.

And one of the reasons we haven't had a growing economy is because it has become too difficult to build in Britain. And proud to be supporting a bill that get Britain building again. I just want to talk briefly on the National Recovery, Which I Think in Principle Is a Policy Masterstroke. What Is Most Shameful about Our Current Setup of Nature legislation is not just it stops us from building the homes and infrastructure are country needs and damages are economy in the meantime.

It doesn't even work on its own terms. Britain is still, as was mentioned earlier, one of the most nature depleted countries in the world. Why? Because the money we forced builders to pay for nature project is not being spent in the most efficient way. Take, for example, as my Honourable friend has pointed out, the infamous Back pointed out, the infamous Back Tunnel. -- Bat Tunnel. Critical infrastructure problem -- projects were cancelled. The project was told for so long.

Well it is a welcome step forward, we must ensure we make it work. It is reliant on workable delivery plans in a timely fashion.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. Can I ask the member if he agrees with me that the member if he agrees with me that open green spaces are not always the most bio diverse? We need a more

**** Possible New Speaker ****

most bio diverse? We need a more joined up approach as to how we can provide investment in those spaces. I do agree and I hope the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do agree and I hope the National recovery fund can be an opportunity to make those spaces opportunity to make those spaces more diverse. I'm trying to support a wetlands project within my constituency that would use money in constituency that would use money in order to in prove -- improve biodiversity. I care about natured recovery in this country. I want to do the right thing and supports -- support these changes rather than trying to defend an indefensible status quo.

Finally, as somebody who owes a lot of my fantastic upbringing to a development corporation, I want to refer to the When we start building the new towns. Of the changes introduced in this bill are promising, at some point, we are going to have to think about this financing. For every pound that was invested in Milton Keynes, we gave more to the Treasury. But currently, any debt issued by these companies, the development corporations to private capital would have to be added to the government balance sheet.

A simple change to Treasury accounting to account them in the same way as banks which fell into public ownership after the financial crash could unlock huge sums of international private capital to fund these vital homes. Is an approach consistent with many European counterparts and we should actively explore it as a priority. I will be supporting this bill today but I also think this is not a moment for self-congratulation. We must continue to go further and faster to build the homes and infrastructure that this country so desperately needs.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Just to pick up on comments by the Just to pick up on comments by the honourable member. I also have a reservoir being currently proposed reservoir being currently proposed in my constituency. Perhaps the in my constituency. Perhaps the Minister could tell us in his winding up how much quicker typical winding up how much quicker typical reservoir will be constructed by as a result of this bill and with the a result of this bill and with the percentage saving of that will be because that sort of detail is currently lacking and points to the
18:25
Steve Barclay Portrait Rt Hon Steve Barclay MP (North East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
-
-
comments that the member claimed. I comments that the member claimed. I take that as a wry smile. Can I just pick up on what the government said last week and what the government is saying this week. As we, the government said it was scrapping NHS England because it wanted to ensure more democratic oversight and yet, this week, they are giving huge this week, they are giving huge powers to another body with Natural powers to another body with Natural England.

The member for Milton Keynes just mentioned the back Tunnel. -- Bat. It's not just the lack of consistency, is the lack of coordination across government. The currently, the government is consulting on the land use framework and that consultation is open. It doesn't close until 25 April. The frontbench seem to be ignoring the because in her opening remarks, the Secretary of State about this bill unlocking land for nature and energy unlocking land for nature and energy schemes.

So you have one part of the government consulting on its land use strategy whilst another part is legislating for seizing land in order to use the schemes within the scope of its ongoing consultation. It would be helpful, perhaps, if the Minister could tell us why he is ignoring his own death department's current consultation -- Defra Department's. If it is indeed necessary, that suggests a significant amount of land is going to be taken furniture restoration schemes. Now, we know that many firms will be lost over a generation.

Either this power is needed, in which case what is the impact on farmland and firm security from clause 72? Or we won't take much land as a result, in which case it questions why we need this. Now, indeed in his opening remarks, the shadow Secretary of State pointed to the number of cabinet ministers themselves that have objected to development schemes in their own constituencies. That is an issue we all face as constituents raise concerns. Why I'm particularly surprised was because once things are in primary legislation, they will often take a good basic interpretation of that.

It would be helpful to understand why they think grants and further powers to seize land is not a weakening of democratic control. The Secretary of State once -- when challenged on this, said that democratic controls would be maintained by -- maintained but streamlined. Let me give the house a practical example. If you look at the first review of Dartmoor where there is conflict between the interpretation of that triple a side of Natural England and the farmers who had farmland for many years, there is huge tension.

That will not happen if the powers under this bill are enacted. Finally, there is a paradox. The people we need on-site to support nature restoration are the farmers. The farmers are the ones who care most about the nature. This bill is a missed opportunity about things like incinerators. Burning plastic, easier to get planning permission. Easier under this bill. The farmers we need on- site will have their land confiscated from an undemocratic body and there's nothing in the bill to address that.

To the Minister clarify some of those points? clarify some of those points?
18:29
Nesil Caliskan Portrait Nesil Caliskan MP (Barking, Labour)
-
-
Thank you very much. I'd like to just declare an interest as the Vice President of the Local Government Association. I support this bill because we must do everything that we can to deliver more housing being built in this country. As a member built in this country. As a member of parking -- as the Member for marking -- Barking, I hear a lot of stories about the housing crisis. We need national initiatives and investment from the government.

We must also change the policy foundations in this country because the national planning system is not fit for purpose. As a former London council leader who delivered a local plan designated Robert designating land for thousands of new homes, I know too well that the existing frameworks frustrate housebuilding. And the voices of those opposing new homes are already owners and are often prioritise. The truth is our planning system relies too much on the political bravery of local This creates a national patchwork of housebuilding.

The planning system is used to slow down decision-making in the hope that eventually the applicant will just give up. So I welcome the bill that the government will create, creating a national scheme of delegation. It will allow professionals to work more effectively ensuring consistency across the country. Allowing planning authorities to be flexible to set up their own fees and recover costs is an important step. But given that there is a national gap of £360 million in terms of the deficit, can I ask the Minister to reassure us all that the councils will be held responsible for ring fencing that income in their planning departments? So that local authorities can improve their performance.

Turning to transport and infrastructure, a crucial component in unlocking the potential for housebuilding because both private and public sector development need clear business cases to build. Strong business cases rely on land which is boosted by infrastructure including, but not exclusively, to transform connectivity. The measures in the bill to streamline the process is welcome but I would like the government to consider if the bill goes far enough. Because, and HS2 back channels are frequently mentioned in this chamber, but there are other examples like that Lower Thames Crossing.

Delayed for over three decades. It has become the U.K.'s biggest ever planning application, over 2000 pages costing £800 million in planning costs. taking applications through the National planning infrastructure projects, but the process is too costly and it takes far too long. And a large part of the problem is that statutory pre-application consultation requirements. It means that all of the parties involved operate in a hyper- risk averse manner. Focusing on endless negotiations. It serves the taxpayer and our community is in no way.

So could I encourage my right honourable friend the Minister to look again at reforming specifically the pre-application process, to reduce delays and get essential infrastructure consented faster.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable lady quite rightly is talking about ambition and making is talking about ambition and making sure that we get planning applications delivered quickly. Dr Shi therefore think that the 56% reduction and the 1694 fewer homes reduction and the 1694 fewer homes that her local Labour council helped to deliver will improve and speed up

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the length of time it will take for those to get through? It gives me an opportunity to highlight that might local authority highlight that might local authority has been building homes far faster than most local authorities across the country. But the general slow in delivery of housing over the past two is is absolutely to do with the fact that the previous government crashed the economy, interest rates went through the roof, inflation went through the roof, and I'm yet to come across a developer or a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

local authority does not say all of this is impacted by the economic past. She is ethically correct that there were some issues with housing supply during the last economic crisis. But the numbers that I am asking about her government's asking about her government's proposals under the new scheme. So can I say, will she say to the can I say, will she say to the constituent or her Labour councillors who she does not think should make planning decisions should make planning decisions locally, Dr Shi personally supports the 1694 fewer houses that her

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the 1694 fewer houses that her government is requiring her counsel to deliver? My local authority is committed to building homes and they have a good record. One of the barriers to being able to deliver homes at speed is the fact that we see infrastructure delayed year after year. The proposals in this bill that will allow CPO's and London Assembly's to move far quicker will mean that we will see homes built at pace in the way that we have not seen in a generation in this country.

Can I take the opportunity to thank the ministers and their team for their work? This bill provides a generational opportunity for us to get housebuilding back on track in this country. It is a welcome shakeup to the planning system. It will help deliver homes in this country, and deliver infrastructure that is so desperately needed. It is the first step of many that will allow us to tackle the housing crisis that my constituents are so badly impacted

**** Possible New Speaker ****

by everything today. I call Greg Smith. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to follow the
18:36
Greg Smith Portrait Greg Smith MP (Mid Buckinghamshire, Conservative)
-
-
It is a pleasure to follow the honourable lady. In what is a critical and important debate that will affect my constituency in mid Buckinghamshire very deeply. We have had some sensible suggestions in this debate from backbenchers on all sides. And particularly I supports the points made on the protection of the points made on the protection of talk, chalk stream's. I do have deep concerns about the tone of this bill and some of the rhetoric that sits underneath the defence of it.

I would categorise it as being a bill that does things to communities, as opposed to with rural communities. And I would gently say to the Minister, who probably can predict some of the things I'm about to say as we sat on the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill committee in the last Parliament. We sat over many weeks, and over many housing ministers in that period. But I will not apologise for representing my constituents who, time after time, are fed up to the back teeth of losing our rural identity and our rural character with the constant flow of both housing and infrastructure projects that devastate our countryside, that devastates the very rural identity of Buckinghamshire.

Before I give way, those of us in Bucks feel we have done our bit with the new town. It now has a population of children 50,000 old Milton Keynes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him four giving way. I wanted to let them know that when I went to visit my 93 year old grandmother who was a rural constituents living in Bucks back in the 1960s. At the time she expressed the 1960s. At the time she expressed many of the things that he just expressed about concern about the city being built around rural city being built around rural communities. You ask her now, and she will tell you about the fantastic opportunities that Milton fantastic opportunities that Milton Keynes gave the children and two grandchildren to the point where one of them is now sitting on these benches able to get the speech in this intervention.

Sometimes you do need to have change and development, I think sometimes we need to do this.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I understand the point the honourable gentleman is making. Milton Keynes is very close to me Milton Keynes is very close to me and I visit it all the time and have many friends there. It is a great many friends there. It is a great city. However, there has got to be a line in the sand drawn, as to the amount of our countryside, the amount of our countryside, the amount of our farmland, the amount of our food producing land that we allow to be lost to development of allow to be lost to development of whatever it is.

My honourable friend from South Leicestershire in his from South Leicestershire in his speech earlier reeled off a list of things that are already happening in his constituency, where they are already playing their part. We have had concerns about a lot of it. An enormous list of things, the amount of housebuilding in Bucks has been extraordinary. If anyone goes to village, it is unrecognisable from what it was because of the sheer volume of new housebuilding that has gone on. As well as incinerators, as well as we are about to get a new prison.

And HS2 has ravaged to the middle of the constituency. It is not like Bucks has not done

**** Possible New Speaker ****

anything. My honourable friend makes an excellent point. We have not only excellent point. We have not only given way for infrastructure with HS2, motorways, data centres across HS2, motorways, data centres across the entire green belt. With very little community consent. And now with this new bill, all community with this new bill, all community consent seems to be going out the window. How can we protect the vital green space that provides in my green space that provides in my constituency the lands of London that will be destroyed because

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that will be destroyed because everyone will want a piece of the small bits of green belt we still have left? I totally agree with my honourable friend. The point she makes is right. It applies in my constituency's, as it does to hers. In my constituency, the backbone of our economy is agriculture. It is food production. The more we see lost, it impacts. The Labour Party used to say that food security was national security yet this bill seeks to build all over that very land that our farmers in Bucks and around the whole country have used to produce that very food gives us that national security.

Where I really want to focus is on the infrastructure implications from the energy sector. I entirely approve of transitioning to a cleaner form of energy production. The point I have made in this house time and time again, and will never get bored of saying it. You need 2000 acres of ground land with solar panels to produce enough electricity for 50,000 homes on current usage, that is before everyone has two Tesla is on the drive, maybe not Tesla. A small modular reactor needs just two football pitches and will deliver enough electricity on current usage for 1 million homes.

Why on earth in this country are we messing around with solar destroying thousands of acres of food producing land when other clean technologies are out there that can clean up our energy production, clean-up and electrically production, the way that is far kinder and gentler on our national fabric and on our rural communities? So when I hear the Secretary of State, as she did in her opening address, talk about protecting high-grade agricultural and, I treat that with a very large pinch of salt.

Because we have caught out in my constituency, in Bucks, those that are paid exorbitant amounts of money to come and graze the land prior to a planning application, deliberately testing the land in the headland of the field. A bit of the field that is not used to grow crops, or to graze animals. Of course they are always going to get a lower land grade by testing the headland. So if the government is serious about wanting to protect high-grade agricultural and, I would urge the Minister to actually look at measures that he could take to ensure that the fertile part of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

field is tested not the headland. I appreciate your judgement giving way. Would he accept that we have to keep this matter in have to keep this matter in perspective? Even under the most ambitious scenarios, solar farms ambitious scenarios, solar farms will provide less than 1% of the U.K.'s Agricultural Land (Planning) Bill. That is why the NUS president stated in relation to solar projects and food security that it is " Important that we are not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Important that we are not sensationalist about the impact. " The point the Minister makes is one that in Bucks I would challenge. I don't think any Labour members whenever there is a very good cross party meeting a couple of weeks ago on the scale of solar projects coming into this country. It is very disproportionate on rural communities, that this bill does seem to take against in favour of the towns and cities of the United Kingdom. I would also say that on top of that stats that I gave earlier about the efficiency of solar, scientists came here, not just campaigners but scientists came here, to give clear evidence that, of all the countries in the world, there is only one less suitable for solar than ours.

That is Iceland. So it is not even like the government is making the case for a technology which is particularly suited to the United Kingdom. Yet they are trying this bill to make it easier, to make those that object challenge on any level to go away and just have to suck it up and take those projects in their backyard. This bill does take away local control. And for me, local control will always be the most important part of the planning process.

For a community that actually knows those fields that, unlike the desktop exercise that is done a far, actually knows the fields that flood every single year, that knows the local factors would impact a planning application, that understands local roads that would have to take construction traffic and get churned up every time the development comes along, local control is critical, and I urge the Minister even at this late hour to go back and to really think about whether he wants to do is ride roughshod over local opinion.
18:45
Peter Lamb Portrait Peter Lamb MP (Crawley, Labour)
-
-
Despite the many fine contributions made, for many, planning seems like quite a cheery subject. I have heard Senior Member this house privately describe it as such. I will remember as a young Labour member sitting through constituency party meetings wonder why we were going off such a long time about planning. Surely education, health, the kinds of things we wanted to focus attention on. I'm afraid it took me a long time until I was one of those very dreary people to realise that planning is not only central to each of these issues but just about every aspect of government policy and indeed our day-to-day lives.

Unfortunately often the system and those we task running it come under attack killing by those who should know better. Kelly's attack for delays, attacked for redtape, tactful perceptions of NIMBYs. For every 10 applications, nine are approved it is hardly the system of development. Where the system does struggles with capacity for supper takes time for decisions to be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would you agree with me when he significantly more planning officers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in the constituencies development? The honourable member is reading ahead. The subsequent decisions required for development to required for development to commence. The impact of these costs commence. The impact of these costs and viability as a result of these delays is hard to understate and these capacities do not stem from laziness, or form of development laziness, or form of development suppression, they stem from one issue which is the absence of sufficient numbers of planners in sufficient numbers of planners in the sector.

The rate of pay is massively out of kilter with the private sector, the consequence of which is increasingly a small number of extremely hard-working people are left to try and keep the system approach. Principally out of their public spiritedness. Yet instead of receiving the thanks they deserve, they have to deal with public rhetoric which regularly denigrates them and the work they do. Madame Deputy Speaker, I hope I am not the first and I will not be the last in this chamber to thank these public servants for their efforts on behalf of our communities and country.

There is much that needs to be done to reverse the declining planning numbers, and while this bill sets out positive steps forward, I remain of the belief there are fewer areas better suited, which returns could be made with the introduction of AI into the public sector, then use the decades worth of computerised training data, to enable simple applications to be dealt with automatically, and free up those expert human planners to deal with cases which genuinely benefit from human I. As a former council leader, I am defensive of the local government in planning.

However, despite my initial scepticism. I found much good in the framework, and much that was good in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, showing this as a government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

genuinely listening to the voices across the sector. Yes. Given his expertise as a former

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Given his expertise as a former council leader, would he agree with me that the piece of the bill where it enables councils to set fees for it enables councils to set fees for planning could be more... Could go further, particularly around the further, particularly around the fees that could be charged for enforcement cases, for example. I am sure he knows the amount of hours getting tied up with officers and inboxes, enforcing rogue individuals inboxes, enforcing rogue individuals who seem to play cat and mouse with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

officials. And would he agree with me looking around that might be a sensible option? I have learned not to look a gift

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have learned not to look a gift horse in the mouth over the years. This is a positive step forward, no This is a positive step forward, no doubt there are steps in the future that could be taken, but this is significant in enabling the system significant in enabling the system to be far more sustainable than it has been of late. There must always be a role for local expertise in planning decisions, there must always be democratic oversight, and for local knowledge to feature in decision-making.

But that does not decision-making. But that does not mean the way we have always done things in the past needs to be the way we do it in the future. Or indeed that it delivers a better or fairer outcome in the future. And that a longer process is not always that better process. I am sure we all have experienced a planning decision, both nationally and locally, which have taken a very long time to produce a decision we all knew would be the final decision on day one.

That in no way meets the needs of residents or our community. Planning, planners tell me, is a matter of balance. And I believe that in this bill, the government balances all of the relevant considerations well. Another example of delivering balance is dealing with nature. There is the second worst housing crisis in the country, Twice on the housing target. I want to point out they are a bottom number to hit, not a top number to hit comedy no longer restrict future development.

But this came to an end when Natural England unilaterally imposed restrictions in old of element of North Sussex, an area I would point out that when you look at the figures is actually larger in its economy than most of our core cities. Due to the basis of the concerns, of the well-being of the snail, as a result, housing delivery in my area has ground to a halt. Economic develop and has been hampered and you would not believe the level of debate that has taken place on Facebook about whether or not tackle Bell is going to open at all.

All of the while, we are waiting for a local water company to build the water infrastructure that no doubt was desperately needed some time. I have nothing against little snails, but the consequence of the decision is almost 2% of my community and now trapped in temporary housing at huge cost to the public sector, not to mention an enormous human cost to those families, until Natural England feels their needs have been satisfied. The ability to improve our natural environment alongside development is a vital part of being able to avoid forcing conflict between human and environmental needs and offsetting processes delivers exactly the changes we require.

I am also pleased in this bill the spatial development strategies, a vital part in ensuring that housing needs are addressed beyond the limitation of any civil authority. Anyone who has dealt with the current system will recognise it is largely a paper exercise which in no way actually delivers the housing required across sub regions. Spatial development strategies have become less and doing so in a coherent and planned out way, a level far closer to more democratic accountable to residents that the old spatial resident strategies, significant improvement.

Madame Deputy Speaker, under this government, the planning system is finally receiving the organisation it needs and I hope they do not stop now. With that in mind, I would like to end on a topic of great concern to me, affordable housing. The NPPF is right do not restrict local plans, excepting differences in local viability and setting out a 15% additional requirement for the land. And no doubt, new towns have a significant role to play in delivering affordable housing, Al as will be smaller to funding so far, but I'm believe that more needs to be done to deliver what is needed, and I can give the Minister many suggestions around this, focusing now on sub regional planning through new spatial development strategies.

Housing is not merely a numbers game, the factors matter, not least the cost of housing, and while there are mechanisms here for delivering on housing numbers for all, I would point out in areas such as my own, with a duty to cooperate is facilitated and meeting those numbers very often results in housing at affordable, and that there are no allocation rights. I very much hope in the work of the government to follow, that these issues are henceforth corrected.
18:53
Robbie Moore Portrait Robbie Moore MP (Keighley and Ilkley, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. There are so many points to address in this bill but I want to keep my remarks to just a few, and I have grave concerns that the agreeable aims of the government to free up our planning system will, by this bill, be dragged further into the bog of planning delay and indecision. Now, there has been a lot of talk about whether or not this bill will afford special protections for people and on a triple Esi, but looking at the details of this bill, I have grave concerns that rather than being a bill that leads to better protections for protected peaks and areas, this bill actually does the opposite.

And I want to start my contribution by explaining why this is such a huge issue. Take Warshaw Moore, in my constituency, just next to the word valley in the beautiful part of West Yorkshire, most importantly, this is an irreplaceable blanket peat bog men. Which -- Bog land, which carries protective status. A site of heavily protected bird species underground nestling birds, and most recently as the proposed site for what would be England's largest onshore wind farm. I am firmly opposed to this development. And this description of a wind farm of the construction of 65 wind turbines, each taller than Blackpool Tower, would be devastating to the protected blanket peat bog.

In fact, peat bogs across the UK store many more times carbon that our forests. Disturbing this people and by constructing a windfarm on top of it could release many tonnes of carbon back into the atmosphere, directly contradicting the aim of the whole development. Namely, to reduce carbon emissions. It simply is nonsensical, Madame Deputy Speaker, to use Warshaw Moore, when the RSPB have shown the government could achieve its own targets for wind power by Without building a single acre of protected people in.

So, to come to the substance of this bill, in relation to this development, the introduction of the environment development plans, on the face of it, seem like a good idea. Why shouldn't developers pay some form of compensation for environmental damage for their developments, and what they do? But as is always the case, when we delve into the detail, things begin to unravel. Once this change effectively amounts to is a mercenary approach to environmental protection. It gives developers a much freer hand to negotiate their commitments.

Indeed, a much freer hand will be provided to the local planning authorities, to make and take a much looser approach in ensuring that developers do their fair bit for the environmental mitigation measures, particularly on protected sites, without the emphasis to do it, but just by providing a financial contribution. But of course, funding for restoration, either on-site, or indeed mitigated elsewhere, does not undo the damage caused by the development itself. Be that assets of scientific, natural or cultural value.

And, in the case of protected peatland, such as Warshaw Moore, that is exactly why the current proposed development is completely the wrong approach. The blogs themselves take a millennia to form, and sparked most breaks down so slowly, just breaking down by 1mm per year, the former peak, and that is why, with the removal of the moratorium and onshore wind farms, allowing more protected peatland to be built on, is the wrong approach by this government, and I cannot stress it enough. This bill moves us from a dynamic where we proactively protect what we value, to one where we barter what we can prize up, and pretend that the value and price are pretend that the value and price are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the same. I will give way. An excellent speech. Many aspects of this bill is going to affect of this bill is going to affect Scotland as well, and we get much more difficult for local residents, like those in my own constituency, who are fighting very hard against the 94 calamity pylon rooted also battery storage plants, making it increasingly difficult for them to oppose those types of application. Now, for me, democratic accountability should be at the accountability should be at the heart of the planning process.

What we seem to be moving to a planning system, which China would be very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

system, which China would be very proud of. Does my honourable friend agree? Absolutely agree with my honourable friend that is why the government should be honest with the public, but far from a bill to strengthen the environmental protections, this bill creates a direct avenue for developers to pay, to do environmental damage, and to get around otherwise which most

**** Possible New Speaker ****

way. The honourable gentleman was here

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable gentleman was here in the last Parliament, does he remember when the previous government, in their attempt to undo the problem, sought today supply the habitats relations entirely? Is that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

habitats relations entirely? Is that the approach a we take? And actually the Minister gets to the nobody issue, in that the the nobody issue, in that the nutrient neutrality issue because absolute, because absolute absolute, because absolute stagnation taking place, and indeed, the government is wanting to give Natural England even more powers, which will lead to even increase stagnation, not only development, but frustration amongst those who do whether they development take place, and many members across the House and many members across the House have referred to the £100 million back tunnel with the development of HS2, a very issue that natural England themselves raised, yet we have the government wanting to give the very organisation even more powers, which will lead to increase stagnation of development.

So, the government may bring forward a bill on these grounds, to create the avenue of creating more development, but this bill does not achieve that in terms of the environmental protection measures being protected. With the government's removal of the moratorium for onshore wind farm development, coupled with the provisions of this bill, I fear for protected peatlands, not only in the beautiful uplands of West Yorkshire, but indeed, right across the country. Secondly, I fear this bill will not create a speedy planning system the government hopes it will.

By placing the design and formulation of the environmental development plans in the hands of Natural England, the government has ceded much of its control over them. As a single issue public body, Natural England operates with a very different interpretation of reasonable mitigations than the rest of the public when it comes to preserving nature. Indeed, as I have already referred to, the £100 billion back tunnel with HS2. As developers, Natural England, and environmental campaigners barter over the details of environmental development plans and launch legal challenges against them, I ask, how will the Secretary of State speed-up our planning system, as she is.

To sit on the sidelines -- As she is forced to sit on the sidelines of these negotiations and watch Natural England take the lead? The Secretary of State is literally creating a bill which hands more power, not less, to Natural England, removing her ability to enforce issuer infrastructure can be delivered at speed. What the government must do, Madame Deputy Speaker, is be honest and upfront about what it values. Finally, Madame Deputy Speaker, I would like to raise another area of this bill.

One that in my view moves from a naivete to the realm of malice. Compulsory purchase orders are highly controversial powers, the best of times, but yet, in another blow to our rural communities, the government has decided landowners should not be paid the value of their land involved. And I will give way to the Minister. Sorry, to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable member. I have got this essay in front of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have got this essay in front of me, where it is argued that when the government pays for new infrastructure, roads, development, in order to knock new housing, the in order to knock new housing, the landowner has to only sit and watch complacency as his poverty multiplies in value, sometimes multiplies in value, sometimes multiple fold, without either a contribution on his part, the argument being the landowner shouldn't get that profit with no shouldn't get that profit with no effort. That is not from Trotsky, that's from Winston Churchill.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

that's from Winston Churchill. It is not fair at all for the state, be it national government or indeed our local authorities to step in and not pay a landowner what market value they deserve. It is absolutely outrageous that this government is putting in legislation, changing section 12 A of the land compensation act on this basis. And I do not think this will create, to any efficiency, within the planning system, nor dare I say creating any better profit, sorry, means of money being spent by local authorities to deliver public

**** Possible New Speaker ****

services. We have seen an example of planning authorities being taken over, in a way that was not the traditional compulsory purchase, with HS2. We saw HS2 be allowed to with HS2. We saw HS2 be allowed to take over properties and not pay the market value, not even take market value, not even take possession and we have seen people still waiting compensation, the homes devastated, losing everything because of HS2's ability to take because of HS2's ability to take

**** Possible New Speaker ****

because of HS2's ability to take I will get to the point, this government approach through this planning and infrastructure Bill is not going to deliver planning done at speed, and will not give the environmental protections that this government has indicated to the wider public. It is not a good bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

With an immediate four minute time limit. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. This will represent the most
19:02
Mike Reader Portrait Mike Reader MP (Northampton South, Labour)
-
-
substantial reform in a generation, and it is critically important to my constituents home in Northampton South. Full too long our planning system has functioned as a break to growth rather than accelerator. When the public thinks about planning they picture and antiquated labyrinth system. Whilst members of this house watched on their TV screens while a soggy prime minister stood outside number 10 I was discussing this topic and a stat stuck in my head were only 17% of people believe the planning system works in their favour.

It is very clear that reform is needed. The bill introduces vital changes to our planning frameworks including improvements to how we deliver nationally significant infra- structure projects. It reforms the CPO powers and measures to boost local planning. I would like to respond to the bill through the lens of how it benefits strategic regional pacemaking and how it can improve the delivery of national infrastructure. Introduction of spatial development strategies and strategic planning is a significant step forward.

Bind with the forthcoming English Devolution Bill it will definitely put more power not less into the hands of local people. For too long, our planning system has lacked the regional coordination that we need to deliver the homes and infrastructure that we need at scale. It is my view that these reforms will help ensure authorities work effectively together across boundaries and across Political parties. Some members of the house will know I worked in construction before I was elected. Real frustration for me has been the lack of pace in delivery of major infrastructure in the UK.

I saw first-hand the delays of the DCO process. Just down the road from me a bypass, while it is a real success story when it was finally delivered, delivered early and on budget, it took three attempts to get through the DCO process. It meant years of congestion and pollution for local residents, and a negative impact on the logistics of manufacturing businesses in Northampton South. More recently my experience working with teams on a Lower Thames Crossing and bypass has shown me just how antiquated and cumbersome process has become.

I welcome steps to improve consenting processes, speed up decision-making and reduce the risk of erroneous judicial reviews for programs as was highlighted in the review. I think this government could go further and I would ask the Minister if he would consider reforming the outdated requirements of pre-submission consultation in the 2008 Planning Act. I'm hugely supportive of this bill's direction but we must recognise that legislation alone can't fix this problem. I will pick up on a comment from my honourable friend the member for Brentford.

We have to look at that Building Safety Regulator to make sure this is not become a problem. Recent data shows that only two higher risk schemes have been approved since the new Gateway process. And now the decision process is taking months. Not the 12 weeks we were expecting from the regulator. It brings me to my final point which is bottlenecks and the concerns I have around environmental delivery plans and the Nature Restoration Fund. I think in principle the solution is a very practical one that will unlock delivery but I would ask the Minister whether Natural England will be given the resources and funding it needs to ensure it does not become a new bottleneck in the planning system.

Overall I fully support this bill and look forward support this bill and look forward to seeing it progressing through the house.
19:06
Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox MP (Bridgwater, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. This bill is about speeding up the planning processes. Speeding up judicial reviews, and speeding up the developers of critical infrastructure. Other elements of the bill that I think are positive, there are others that risk undermining the long-term success of any development. The bill gives the Secretary of State the power to decide the consenting groups for individual projects. Bypassing local input and oversight. This is combined with the overall reduction in local democratic control, like the significant powers of local councils to planning officers.

Currently planning committees of the place where elected officials can reflect local concerns and represent their communities in decision-making for top by shifting more power to unelected officers, you risk alienating the public and further eroding trust in the democracy. This is especially important given the shift towards creating larger unitary authorities. We have seen this in Somerset where my constituents have seen a small but effective planning authority replaced by a larger but less effective unitary council. This may of course be connected to the fact that Somerset is run by the Liberal Democrats.

If local decision-making becomes more detached, how can we be sure that development will reflect the needs and desires of the people who will live with them.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does he recall that when the conservative leaders on the district conservative leaders on the district pushed through unitary and they voted against it when the Conservatives pushed it through?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Conservatives pushed it through? I thank the gentleman for his intervention. Of course the Liberal intervention. Of course the Liberal Democrats are responsible since 2022 for the mess that has become Somerset. Whilst I am in favour of Somerset. Whilst I am in favour of building more houses in principle, this must be done in a way which brings local communities with us. We must ensure that new developments are accompanied by the right infrastructure. Schools, health centres, roads, and the proper number of green spaces.

When the government announced its new housing targets, it became immediately apparent that the bulk of the increase would be in rural areas. So while Somerset as a whole has seen an increase of 41% its housing targets, the city of Bristol has seen its target reduced by 11%. If it is related to the high number of Labour councils in Bristol and the small number of Labour councillors in Somerset then we should be told. This bill also proposes a new Nature Restoration Fund which developers can pay into to offset environmental impacts rather than conduct individual environmental assessments.

Whilst I see the logic of this move in some cases, I have concerns about the impact in Somerset. Given the network of waterways across the Somerset levels, the environmental impact of any individual site has the potential to spread to a much wider area than in much of the rest of the country. It is for reasons such as these local accountability is so important. By shifting the panning system to make it too top-heavy, the government risks and intended local consequences. On the subject of compulsory purchase powers, the government argues that streamlining this process will allow housing and infrastructure projects to progress more quickly.

I'm concerned about the abuse of power particularly in relation to agricultural and and green spaces. By simplifying acquisitions and reducing protections for affective landowners, the bill could pave the way for large-scale development that displays communities. They damage the environment and undermine agricultural interests. The government has already done great damage to the farming community in Somerset, with their family farm tax the closure without notice of the sustainable farm initiative incentive. This proposal seems like another government scheme to impoverish our farmers.

In conclusion, while the government aims to address the housing crisis and accelerate infrastructure development is important, this bill raises significant concerns. It risks undermining local democracy, inflammatory protections, and the ability of citizens to hold the developers and others to account. If we are to build a sustainable future responsive needs of communities, we must approach this bill with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

caution. That is why I shall seek to improve this bill before giving it 1/3 reading. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. I speak today in strong support of this bill. At its heart is a vision forgetting building again. The right
19:11
Lee Pitcher Portrait Lee Pitcher MP (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme, Labour)
-
-
forgetting building again. The right way for the right reasons. This is critical to overcoming many of the challenges we face as a country. It is central to the missions of change that the public has entrusted with us. And a call to action that we as a country must answer. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill lays out a bold plan to modernise the planning system. As someone who worked for decades with engineers and operational workers, I can tell you it is long overdue.

It seeks to make the system more efficient and responsive to the demands of 21st- century economy. One capable of supporting the ambitions of this government that we have set forth. By delivering 1.5 million new homes, and in the cost-of-living and putting more money back into people's pockets. And making Britain a global green energy technology, tackling the climate crisis and creating thousands of high skilled well-paid jobs. The housing crisis is an issue that affects too many families across the country. Far too many, the dream of owning or renting a home where they live and work is slipping further out of reach.

It is a question I was asked on many occasions by young adults at hustings, who have never thought they would get a single foot on the housing ladder going forward. I'm proud that we are doing something about this. This bill aims to tackle this challenge streamlining the planning process, cutting delays and accelerating the building of new homes. To introduce measures that will allow us to build homes for they are most needed, whilst ensuring the developer to sustainable. But it is not just about building new homes, it is doubling affordable homes.

For years waiting lists for social housing stretched beyond acceptable limits. Families waited years for a safe and affordable place to live. I have a mum in my constituency with three children all under five in temporary accommodation. Because of Section 21, she has no kitchen to make food, no place to wash the children's clothes and has no hope left. This bill tackles this reality had on and provides hope. I slept out of running up the 40 other individuals to raise awareness of homelessness.

And took the time to discuss the housing crisis. That same night 3350 children were homeless in Yorkshire and Humber. That is just wrong. It was wrong in the 1990s when I became homeless with my mum and sister, and it is not just wrong now it is actually unacceptable in the 2020s. This bill will make a real difference in communities across the UK. It gives local councils the tools they need to meet the housing demand while ensuring that social housing is built in the right places and to the highest standards.

It also recognises the need for infrastructure investment in driving prosperity. From towns to cities we must invest in transport, digital connectivity and energy systems. The bill lays the groundwork for lodging for such projects make it easier for local authorities and critical projects such as new roads and energy solutions and expanding brick transport networks. Massively important for rural and urban communities. And to make sure infrastructure evolves around Malta needs to enable efficient travel across communities. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill is a vital step forward in addressing some of the most pressing issues facing our country.

I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the house to support the bill. Let us unite building a more prosperous and sustainable and secure future for the people we serve. No child should go to sleep at night not knowing if they have a roof over their precious heads tomorrow. We can solve this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

together. I call Angus MacDonald. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister's decision to introduce Minister's decision to introduce powers of the bill discount scheme to support household close to new to support household close to new electricity transmission of the structure. However, to be clear, this scheme is nothing like enough.
19:15
Angus MacDonald Portrait Mr Angus MacDonald MP (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
this scheme is nothing like enough. If all short as both a meaningful community benefit and is a measure to address local opposition to new infrastructure projects. The proposed two and £50 discount for those close to infrastructure equates to just 6.25% of built in rural Britain each year. It is not even match the cancellation of the £300 Winter Fuel Allowance. Even this modest £250 concession is limited to a decade. For families who will be living aside towering pylons and substations, this is a portrait of for the lasting impact on their environmental quality-of- more fundamentally, why are rural communities already paying the highest prices in our country.

Meant to accept a Jamaican offer. In our towns and cities, households with access to mains gas pay about 6p per kilowatt of energy, in contrast, those are rural areas who are far more likely to be affected by this infrastructure, paid 24p per kilowatt per hour for their energy. How is it right the very communities living alongside renewable energy generation are facing some of the highest rates in fuel poverty, and are expected to pay four times as much as those on mains gas? Renewable energy is cheaper to produce, yet rural households are being charged four times the price of largely ported -- Imported mains gas.

Where is the fairness in that? If the government is serious about ensuring the benefit from infrastructure, it must do better than this miserable £250 per year. Beyond the energy costs, the Minister will be aware the transmission companies, anticipate being required to build temporary housing for their workers. They have offered to build a legacy housing, which will remain for the rural communities. This bill does not cover that. Affordable housing is one of the biggest challenges facing rural Britain. By including legacy housing for the future, you can make a real difference to affordable housing in these areas.

Could the Minister please explain why this has been omitted and commit to addressing it? If the government wants communities to accept new infrastructure, it must offer something really meaningful in return. Real lasting benefits, that acknowledge the burden placed on those living alongside the developments. The energy Bill discount created in its current form

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is a long way from that. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. May I start by putting on record my May I start by putting on record my strong support for this bill. But I want to focus my attention and my contributions today on two specific contributions today on two specific aspects of the bill for separately nature recovery and electricity infrastructure. Net Zero and nature are two sides of the same coin and
19:18
Jenny Riddell-Carpenter Portrait Jenny Riddell-Carpenter MP (Suffolk Coastal, Labour)
-
-
are two sides of the same coin and would be no value if it was one without the other. The proposed environmental delivery plans, and the Nature Restoration Fund, are positive steps forward that can really transform nature's recovery. In Suffolk, we have already seen how this idea can work well. The Wildlife Trust biodiversity gain service has helped to establish new nature reserves, but more can be done to make sure nature and development sits happily alongside each other. Firstly, we must make it explicitly clear that there are to be firm timeframes for delivery confirmation -- Conservation methods set out.

Secondly, we must have higher expectations of what we can expect from developers. Nature Richard St Aubin spacious, solar panels are new builds, these are incredibly simple -- Nature Richard St Aubin spaces, solar panels and new builds, these are incredibly civil things we can expect. Madame Deputy Speaker, I want to turn to the electricity aspects of this bill and why this is important in Suffolk Coastal, where we have many things planned, size and sea, National Grid, National Grid ventures and ScottishPower renewables.

It is often said that of the 25% of the U.K.'s energy will be either made or transported through my constituency. We are home to some of the most important biodiverse sites in the important biodiverse sites in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

UK, with 36 SSSI sites in the constituency, and over 50% of Suffolk Coastal is designated as a national landscape. I thank the honourable lady, she

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady, she is quite right, outlining some of is quite right, outlining some of the aims of this bill, how the environment should be protected. Can I ask her how she defends her constituents that her housing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

constituents that her housing targets under her Minister's proposals will be uplifted by 82%? I wonder if he will roll that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wonder if he will roll that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wonder if he will roll that line out to every member, because I am actually talking about the SSSIs and infrastructure, rather than housing at the current moment. Not only is this recognised by the government I talk of comedy natural landscapes, but they are critical for this government, if we are to deliver on our ambitions to improve biodiversity. Madame Deputy Speaker, there has been much talk in the press about NIMBYs of late. But I want to ask the Minister, people NIMBYs, if they ask why it is that nature marshlands and nature reserves are picked as the best place for National Grid energy infra structure to make landfall.

We question why all four of these projects are being brought forward in isolation of each other and with no coordination. And our people NIMBYs if they fully support our country's push to Net Zero but they ask if they can also do more to pick nature? -- Protect nature? I think if we listened more to these varied questions, we can do more to protect nature and progress with Net Zero. Madame Deputy Speaker, the previous government totally vacated the space of leadership in our country's energy and biodiversity planning.

That void was filled by energy developers, who were left to take the lead and left to bring forward proposals that were totally unsuitable in our landscapes. All because it was cheaper than taking projects to landfill sites. What we have been left with a series of uncoordinated lack all projects on the East Coast of England. The networks should be extended to create a land and sea use framework to allow for better leadership and coordination of energy infrastructure projects. First and foremost, it's critical to ensure energy developers who are working in the same area together, work with communities to plan for the community of impact of these fast projects.

The committee often has answers to the problems the developers do not. For instance, farmers told me making sure network cables are a minimum of 1.8 m, required on animal farming land, this is the minimum legal standard required for animal farmers to continue to use their land for farming, it seems common sense that this is a requirement. Madame Deputy Speaker, I do not have time today to go into all the details of community benefits, to deliver the need of community hosted infrastructure. But I will say, whilst I welcome the recent announcements from government, with communities in mind, may be set to host substations to benefit from it, I think we can be far more ambitious.

I think we can and should expect more from private firms who are profiting so vastly from the great green energy revolution. Madame Deputy Speaker, use the government to consider these aspects of the bill. Thank you.
19:23
Blake Stephenson Portrait Blake Stephenson MP (Mid Bedfordshire, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. As a central Beds counsellor, I refer members to my vested interest. There is much to welcome in this bill, particularly its ambition to get the nationally significant infra structure built to support our country. While on housing, I agree with the government's targets that favour building an overall countryside, rather than the densification of our cities, where building homes will alleviate the worst of the acute housing crisis, I do recognise the government's mandate to the 1.5 million homes, and the need for ambitious planning reform.

But what is the government doing to ensure the 1.6 million homes with existing and planning improved are built? I see nothing in this bill. Beds has done is share in housing, growing by 16 and 18% respectively over 10 years. We are not antidevelopment, but some development has changed the count of our historic market towns and quiet villages forever. Development is increasing flooding risk, for example, in Maldon, in my constituency, where compounded upslope development has exacerbated the impact of flooding. I developed has not delivered long promised infrastructure, like in my constituency, a development where shovels first went on the ground nearly 2 decades ago but constituents are yet to see the delivery of a new GP surgery.

It is because of these kinds of issues that communities have become hardened to the prospect of yet more building. At this government has a real opportunity, with thought and consideration, to create a planning system that people can have confidence in. Instead, those people have been dismissed simply as blockers. The pensioners who fear a flood every time it rains, blockers. The young parents who cannot get their GP, get to their GP, because one has not been built in their town, blockers. People with real genuine concerns who in this House are elected to stand up for, Madame Deputy Speaker, they are not blockers.

This bill could do much more for them. I will gladly give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

way. On that point, my honourable friend makes an excellent point on friend makes an excellent point on the " Blockers", these are people living in floodplains, waiting years living in floodplains, waiting years for GP surgery and never be delivered in any key infra structure delivered in any key infra structure they have asked for, and they cannot have property built in certain places, because of a floodplains that is not acknowledged in this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that is not acknowledged in this bill and there is no provision for those residents in this bill. Absolutely, I thank my honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely, I thank my honourable friend for that intervention. Since Beds was flooded in September, ministers will know I have been vocal about improving resilience. The government can do that in this bill. New houses mean nothing if residents find themselves ankle-deep in water, in their living rooms, as they did across the country last year. I would like to see a strengthening of the natures -- Measures of improving database solutions to flooding. I would like to see schedule three of the water and Management act brought into force of issuer communities have the right protections from flooding, but like to see this bill give more powers to drainage boards, to take over the maintenance of infrastructure projects, to protect people from flooding.

And if not, local authorities should have the local powers to ensure drainage is maintained. I would also like to see more robust measures in this bill, ruling out development on flood place, to my honourable friend's point. This bill could make a real difference to resilience, and I would urge the government not to miss this opportunity. Despite protections, we still see problems in the floodplains. Rivers do not know or care we are here. We need to make room for our rivers.

We must get out of their way, with stronger protections against development in floodplains. Turning briefly to new towns. New towns are provided for in this legislation through development corporations, it will be important to ensure those corporations have the power to deliver real places and communities. Not just cookie-cutter dormitory on train line, the developers might like to churn out for the highest possible profit margins. New towns should capture the essence and spirits of the communities to which they are sown, and they need to be beautiful, as a deputy minister did reflect in her opening remarks.

The government should also address important questions they are currently dodging on how these new towns willing to play with the wider development, local development strategies. I'm disappointed not to see some of that detail ironed out in this bill. New towns will result in a double whammy of housing development for some communities. But we do not know yet exactly how damaging that might be. And the government are also yet to confirm whether the housing new towns provider will count towards a five year land supply.

Meaning our communities could be forced to take far more housing than they need, without the right infrastructure, unless this bill is strengthened. In conclusion, Madame Deputy Speaker, this government talks about being on the side of the builders and not the blockers. Without improvements to this bill, I'm afraid it is almost guaranteed to create a new generation of so-called blockers. Homes are needed so that young people can aspire to own their own home and can do so. Blockers, as this government next to call them, are not standing in the way of progress, they are standing up for their communities against bad development.
19:29
Luke Murphy Portrait Luke Murphy MP (Basingstoke, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Can I congratulate the Secretary of State and the Minister of state for housing, for bringing this bill before the House. Not least because I really believe this bill is potentially the most important to be brought forward in this Parliament. Because, as a country, we have not been building a home is. Or infrastructure. Nor does our planning system deliver for nature. This is about more than just homes, infrastructure, and nature. This is the root cause, or one of the root causes, of our falling productivity, it has been undermining growth and undermining jobs as well.

But it is also about a home and a roof over people's heads, this is fundamentally about people. My parents grew up in council housing, my and grandparents spent most of their lives in council housing. My grandma and grandad were low-wage cleaners, with my Nan working into her 70s, living in a council flat in Battersea, for the best part of 50 years. And what that council flat offered was the foundation for them to bring up my dad, and on my mum's side, my mum, later on, to provide the security for myself and my sister and for a better life.

But too many people in low-wage jobs, wherever you are in the country, can no longer afford to buy or rent a home. That is fundamentally what this bill is about. To say we wouldn't start from here is an understatement. In 2010, then housing minister of the claims that they would, the Conservative government, would radically improve housing affordability. In my constituency, it massively decreased, 6.8 with the multiple of median house prices to earnings, when the previous government came to power.

It was 8.8 by the end of it. George was one promised a major change in how we build infrastructure. In this country. What he failed to mention was that the average consent time for the nationally significant infrastructure projects would nearly infrastructure projects would nearly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In my constituency we have hundreds of acres of land, and it is hundreds of acres of land, and it is perfect for nuclear power. They have not completed a nuclear power station in over 30 years as a country. Part of the reason for that is the state of our planning system. is the state of our planning system. Does he agree with me that by making these changes will be able to unlock vital national infrastructure like nuclear?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

nuclear? I thank him for intervention and it is no surprise that he is raising the issue of nuclear for which he is a doughty champion. I very much agree. I agree with the need to build new nuclear and I recognise the previous government's failure to do so. Fundamentally that is what this bill is about. It is about building more homes. It is about building infrastructure and about protecting nature. In my constituency of Basingstoke, we are a growing town. We have been a growing town for many years.

Since the 1960s, we have grown significantly. Different I want to see this bill bring about is a different approach will stop yes, build the homes desperately needed but ensure they are more affordable. And also build the necessary infrastructure alongside those homes. And also protects nature as well. The previous government did none of those things. I wanted to mention a few of the measures which I particularly welcome in the bill. The commitment on nationally significant infrastructure projects, to cuts the timeline by 50% is incredibly welcome.

Internationally this country has become a laughing stock in terms of our ability to deliver significant infrastructure. The proposals and measures to overhaul the connections to the grid for the electricity network also incredibly welcome. Polling showed that 75% of those polled involved in the issue of clean power found that the grid connection issue was the biggest barrier to us delivering on our clean power ambitions. On transport, it streamlines and improves our measures on transport infrastructure. And it improves the rollout of electric vehicle charges, the technology which the benches opposite now pose.

On planning, I really welcome the changes not just in this bill the previously announced by the government. One of the key reasons why developments the key reasons why developments have been bunged up in the planning system is because of the lack of capacity within the planning system to deliver on them. And it should restore the role of the planner. Not just as a tick box exercise but to genuinely plan places in which people live. As someone who also is a political adviser to the Labour opposition in 2010 and 2015, I also highly endorse the proposals around development corporations and compulsory purchase.

Unlike what has been said of the benches opposite, CPO reform is essential to delivering the housing that we need. As the honourable Member for Milton Keynes North highlighted, it was backed by Winston Churchill, proposals and recognition that actually home value did not belong to the landowner but it was a result of government investment in infrastructure and was recognised by known left-wingers such as Adam Smith. Going back to where I started, fundamentally what this bill is about is delivering affordable homes for people that badly need it, wherever you live.

I want to be able to look my constituents in the eyes and say they will have access to an affordable home just like my grandparents did so many years ago.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. Firstly I would like to say I wholly respect the intention behind this bill. It is a serious attempt to solve a serious problem. I also
19:35
John Milne Portrait John Milne MP (Horsham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
solve a serious problem. I also recognise what was happening under the Conservatives did not work and never could have worked even when given it a thousand years. What it achieved was to yield house price inflation which is now created destructive division between the haves and have-nots. But the way I look at it is through the lens of my own constituency. Will it work for my constituency? And deliver affordable homes in the right places at the right environmental standards.

I think the answer is no and the main reason is they are making the same mistake as the previous system. The problem lies with how housing targets are worked out. Not the national target but local targets. Why are targets so hard to meet? Because the Conservatives invented a catastrophically bad formula for calculating housing need called the standard method. It measures the ratio of local house prices to local wages, but the idea is that you just keep holding houses until the price comes down.

The any problems it didn't work. It turns out that in Horsham, as in many places, the average price of a new house is actually higher than the existing stock. So the more we build, the worse the ratio gets and the higher the target goes. That is exactly the opposite of what should happen. Unfortunately this bill has the same flawed Tory statement. Target controlled planning permissions but that is not the same thing as actual that is not the same thing as actual Does that mean we should build the same? No it does not.

We should cover every acre it is not like a permission but the market. Homes don't get built faster because developers can't sell faster. 80% of what we build today is aimed at the top 20% of the market. All of this was described well in Oliver let Wynn's analysis back in 2017. The housing markets does not behave as one market. It is six parallel markets, and the houses were building a largely serving the top. So I'm desperate to build more affordable homes in Horsham.

Clogging up the system with unbelievable permissions is not the way to do it. The best way to have more homes is to build with consent. I said I would judge this legislation when it would work in Horsham and the answer is it won't.
19:38
Peter Prinsley Portrait Peter Prinsley MP (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket, Labour)
-
-
Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. Imagine an English village if you still can, old houses around the village green, a little school a pub or two, a post office and a row of shops, an ancient church and a creaking gate and some crooked headstones with ancient oaks. Maybe a place where old maids have holy communion through the mists of the autumn. This sort of village is disappearing. If you visit now you will find the pub shut for lack of drinkers, shops empty and the vicar gone.

No doctors surgery, no bus route. Isolated elderly residents and not a child inside. As if the Pied Piper had been to visit. Ageing parents with none of their family nearby to help, like so many, problems in this country, housing lies at the centre of it. Houses occupied by commuters with cards in the driveway, or retired folk whose children have long since moved. For the lowest paid people, housing is more expensive the countryside then every urban area except London.

The cheapest housing costs nine times the average income of the lowest paid quartile. As the government constructs 1.5 million houses, let's think long and hard about where we will put them. This bill together with the changes the government has made to the National Planning Policy Framework do much to loosen restrictions on housebuilding. The designation of land as grey belt is all good for those in suburban Greenbelt but more can be done to earmark land for housing deep in the country.

We ought to encourage more housebuilding at a small scale in the extra villages. For hundreds of years this was the model of expansion across all of England. It has produced our prettiest villages were progressively newer buildings radiate outwards. This is the sort of development that preserves the character of the village. It is the most popular form of development in the countryside, and the campaign to protect rural England has put its name to call for small-scale affordable housing on the edge of villages.

We already have places set aside on the periphery of towns and villages, across the country, for delivering such community scale housing. These are called small rural exception sites. Currently these allow affordable housing to be granted for local development small sites. Not usually granted planning permission. Though these are intended to promote construction of affordable homes, most of these are actually developed. What is needed are minor changes to the national planning guidance to allow for proper development. This will help us to get a lot more use out of them, spurring reasonably sized development.

Enter the pattern of relocation that causes family times to fragment. Construction would energise the economy of the village, giving work to local firms which are well placed to deliver housing quickly and efficiently. This government can regenerate rural England. This is surely our generation's chance so let's grasp

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it. I call Bradley Thomas.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call Bradley Thomas. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. I think it is important, as I think I think it is important, as I think this whole house has suggested through the speeches we have heard, that our country does need more
19:42
Bradley Thomas Portrait Bradley Thomas MP (Bromsgrove, Conservative)
-
-
that our country does need more homes particularly for young people. The most obvious steak young person can have in a society's ownership of their own property where they live with their family. It is important government gets this right in their approach will stop there is much to commend the government's bill. There are also a few points I would like the Minister to focus on. Firstly the rural urban divide that has become quite apparent. My constituency and villages is 89% green belt, it is to the south of Birmingham and the north of Worcestershire.

In many ways it is a rural idyll. Yet Bromsgrove is seeing the housing targets set by government increased by 85% at a time when adjacent Birmingham's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

housing target is decreasing by... My honourable friend makes an

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend makes an excellent point because the same thing is true in London. We are seeing London housing targets seeing London housing targets decline for the Mayor of London who actually has not met any of his actually has not met any of his housing targets, where all of those extra housing numbers have been forced onto the outer counties forced onto the outer counties surrounding London. I'm not sure if that is actually fair was going to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that is actually fair was going to produce the housing people need. I thank my honourable Friend and she makes a good point. It leads me to a point I want to stress which is around intensive urban densification. There's a real opportunity that our country faces if we focus on increasing the number of properties particularly in larger urban areas including London, including Birmingham. Some of the larger towns across many of our constituencies, this is a great opportunity to regenerate those

**** Possible New Speaker ****

towns. He makes a very interesting and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He makes a very interesting and powerful point, as a fellow West Midlands MP, I see that in my own Midlands MP, I see that in my own constituency. Does he agree with me that if we can genuinely regenerate that if we can genuinely regenerate our high streets, our town centres, that is the way of revitalising them that is the way of revitalising them and it takes the pressure off the peripheral areas and protects us against being subsumed into the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

against being subsumed into the cities of the urban areas? I agree wholeheartedly with my right honourable friend. She makes a very important and pertinent point. If we get this urban densification right, as a catalyst for the economic and social upheaval of town centres that is desperately needed. I will make progress and give way. Links to this is a really pertinent important point to focus on the quality and aesthetic of the development taking place. I have long been a firm advocate for design codes and the role that locally led police making principles can play in determining the quality of an area, the attractiveness of it for future inward investment.

I do believe instinctively that residents across the country are not NIMBY, but I fear that successive governments, including previous conservative ones, killing the Labour one before that, have allowed mediocrity to rain. There is a lack of local distinctiveness in development that causes an entrenched perception of NIMBY is to be running through our country. So I want the government to consider reinstating the office that was disbanded back in July and think about the importance of aesthetically based place making principles of the role they can play in promoting positive impacts of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Later that, we have I think an opportunity to promote smaller, more artisanal developers, particularly those focused on developing the vocational skills needed to generate vocational skills needed to generate the next incoming pipeline of talent to support the housebuilding to support the housebuilding industry. There are a couple of points in particular Robert like to points in particular Robert like to make, certainly in relation to my constituency but I think probably constituency but I think probably apply to many others across the country, what is around that protection of the greenbelt.

The greenbelt is a technical designation, but to the public at large, it is often considered to be much open fields and meadows. My constituency has got this very large buffer between Bromsgrove and Birmingham, and is not the case that residents of Bromsgrove are name B, I don't believe they are, but what they do not want is the identity of Bromsgrove to be eroded, and by virtue, become an extension of Birmingham. And I think that identity word, for me, and I know many of my constituents, underpins the fundamentals that we should be talking about.

This is about the lifestyle that people identify with. When I think about constituents from my area, you have probably grown up in Birmingham, they have moved into North Worcestershire. In many cases, they have done it because there was an aspirational element to it. They are moving to the countryside and want to benefit from the countryside that Worcestershire offers, whilst being within close proximity to Birmingham and all of the services I'm going to wrap up my comments, Madame Deputy Speaker, but for quick points I would like the government to focus on.

Consider dense urban densification and the role that compliant delivering housing, particularly where young people live in the role that can play, in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

regenerating town centres that are undergoing... I will give way, quickly. Thank you for giving way. It

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for giving way. It

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for giving way. It That he is speaking a lot about building where young people live. One thing that concerns me as a fellow ruler MP as young people are fellow ruler MP as young people are forced out of our rural communities. They recognise that actually, we need to look at intelligent, targeted, moderate housebuilding in those communities to preserve them

**** Possible New Speaker ****

those communities to preserve them for the future and preserve the democratic future? He makes a very good point and it is what I do not disagree with, we have got to strike a better balance. That is the point I am making. This leads me to my second point around infrastructure. Bromsgrove has suffered a lot of development in recent years, it has not had the a church that has gone with it, if you want to strike the right balance, enabling young people to stay in the communities they grow up, particularly rural ones, we need a housing there and need to recognise rural areas can't do all the heavy lifting.
19:48
Kirsteen Sullivan Portrait Kirsteen Sullivan MP (Bathgate and Linlithgow, Labour )
-
-
For 14 young years, growth in the United Kingdom stagnated, trainers not deliver, energy and digital in a structure not fit for demand, and a planning system that has not kept pace with the needs of local communities. So, I welcome this communities. So, I welcome this bill, as we can now see a pathway to a country where every family can access affordable housing, where businesses thrive with top tier digital connectivity, and transport networks support growth rather than hinder it.

Introduction of a national scheme of administration will empower local planning officers to decide applications more quickly, to support local communities and businesses. At the same time, it is critical the democratic process remain strong and the voices of residents, as well as that of local councillors, are heard, if possible delays and appeals are to be avoided. And I welcome very much the reassurances given by my right honourable friend on this point earlier today. But in Scotland, unfortunately, we have all too often had a different story.

With locally democratically make planning decisions routinely overturned by the Scottish government's supporters, leaving communities feeling ignored, with developments earmarked and areas retched with fauna and -- Flora and fauna and the infrastructure is already creaking at the seams. Now, another issue that is one of long-standing, is the shortage of planning officers, with 8/10 planning departments shortstaffed at a national shortage shortstaffed at a national shortage of around 2,500 planners. Again, this is a problem that both SNP and Tory governments have failed to tackle, and indeed, have exacerbated this through the hollowing out of local government.

I welcome the government's commitment to ensure local authorities have the skilled planning officers they need, with the right level of trust and empowerment to decide applications more quickly. But we must also consider the severe skill shortages across several sectors, over which both Tory and SNP governments have presided, from planners to construction workers. We cannot deliver the physical and digital infrastructure without the people to deliver it. On Friday, I visited civil training in my constituency, which specialises in construction and plant courses.

It is clear from the discussion, there was huge concern in the business community that the skill shortages are not addressed, contracts will be lost, jobs will be lost, and opportunities for young people will go elsewhere. So I was delighted to hear yesterday that this government will train up to 60,000 more construction workers, providing industry with certainty, that we are committed to investing in construction and infrastructure. Communities and industries have long waited for a government that takes the challenges of energy planning and development seriously.

This bill is ambitious in its goals. More than that, it is ambitious for communities, ambitious for businesses across the United Kingdom and it will get Britain building again.
19:52
Jess Brown-Fuller Portrait Jess Brown-Fuller MP (Chichester, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
My constituents and I come in Chichester, know how lucky we are to live in such a beautiful part of the UK and we need to see growth, so our young people can stay in our local communities, so they can buy homes in areas they have grown up in. So they can continue to contribute to the economy and keep Chichester thriving for generations to come. The reality of the planning system in my little patch of the country is that it is not fit for purpose.

With the district council's footprint the district council's footprint covering 70% as a national park, and then 5% as a national landscape, the ambitious total for housing allocation in our area is squeezed into just 25%. Of the available land, in a ribbon, which is creating coastal squeeze. This has led to high density developments built, without adequate infrastructure, leaving my residence failing -- Facing daily challenges, with the horrendous congestion on the 827, finding local school places for their children, or quite simply getting a GP appointment.

The current system has left my communities really frustrated, local businesses unable to grow, local councils tied up in red tape, unable to plan. Planners have a duty to create communities, not just buildings, but the nature of the planning system working now mean developers are not only putting forward proposals that look at their patch they are trying to develop, rather than the wider picture around it. And the local councillors elected to represent their areas are fighting with their hands tied behind their backs.

At both Chichester District Council, an application may be refused by the planning committee, perhaps due to flooding risks, loss of grade 1 agricultural land, or inadequate infra structure in the area, only to be overturned at appeal, which is a costly time-consuming process, taking planners out of the planning department, where they are trying to plan. The previous administration at Chichester District Council allowed the local plan to expire, which had , on a plane susceptible to extreme flooding that seems to be getting worse and worse.

The new administration in 2023 focused on getting a robust local plan in place, which has now been through inspection, to the relief of communities across Chichester, and it protects areas like the peninsula, and prioritises brownfield development, which we all share across this House, should be the priority for planning. But the government knew very ambitious housing target could force the Chichester District Council back to square one and put all the power back into the hands of developers, because we are being asked to increase our housing target by nearly 100%.

Because, Madame Deputy Speaker, we do not have a planning crisis, we have a building crisis. Developers are land banking consents, rather than getting on and delivering the homes we need, because demand drives up prices. There are more than 1.4 million homes with fully consenting permissions that have not been built since 2007. This bill does not tackle the workforce issues already supply chain issues and also doesn't acknowledge that water companies, which are responsible for vital infrastructure, to ensure their reliance on storm overflows, reducing overtime, not consulted over individual planning applications because they are not statutory consultees, the Minister knows this is something I have called for in the debates.

And finally, Madame Deputy Speaker, there is no target for social homes in this legislation. And currently, I have a situation where registered providers in Chichester are refusing to take on the social homes of the smaller mixed-use sites, favouring the larger development and prioritising upgrading their existing housing stock which is putting the viability of social homes in my area at serious risk and they are homes that we are desperate crying out for. Thank you.
19:56
Andrew Lewin Portrait Andrew Lewin MP (Welwyn Hatfield, Labour)
-
-
I spent the last seven years of my career working in the social housing sector, so I like to think I have some understanding of the scale of the housing challenge, the mistakes made by previous administrations, and why now is the time to be bold. We need this planning bill to be bold, because at present, we are witnessing a housing crisis in three acts. Firstly, if you are a private rental, across the country, private rented spent nearly 1/3 of their household income on their housing costs.

Private renters in all incoming quintiles spend the higher proportion of their income on rent, compared to people who live in homes of any other tenure. We know the problem is especially acute in our cities, and in the south of England. The affordability challenge is not just a problem for the individual, it is a problem for society. Money that would otherwise be spent in the everyday economy is going to private landlords. Links to the second point, the vast majority of private rent is aspire to homeownership.

But as private renting increases in house prices stay stubbornly high, the dream of homeownership looks ever more distant for those not lucky enough to rely on the bank of mum and dad. In my own constituency, the median house price, £435,000, is almost 11 times the median income of £40,000. Thirdly, the crisis in social housing. Since the Right to Buy took effect in 1981, we have seen a net loss of social homes in almost every single year since. And I did want to reflect on exchange earlier on in the debate, to my colleague, the member for Basingstoke and the frontbench, because this problem of the Liberal Democrats, this problem was at its worst at the time of the coalition.

As my honourable friend for Basingstoke said, there was a for Basingstoke said, there was a dramatic cut in the ground for social and affordable housing under that government, and there was a double whammy, because the Conservative Prime Minister increased the discounts for help to buy in the same Parliament. I would say to the Liberal Democrats, the former leader did an apology video for university fees, they may want to consider one for the record on social housing. Madame Deputy Speaker, to meet this crisis, we need to use all the levers at our disposal to build the homes and communities the country needs.

And I want to focus briefly, in the time left, on two points. The first is clause 46 which has attracted some interest in this debate. And the provision to streamline planning decisions on smaller sites. Look, it's vital there remains local accountability in the planning system. That is protected through the need to have local plans in every community, all of which will require democratic consent. It is equally important we speed things up. So we don't lose months and years endlessly debating smaller sites that have already been debated delegated in the local plan.

Aspiring homeowners, harder printers, and those in social housing do not have the time. Secondly, close 91 of the bill, bringing in the overdue changes of the removal of home value, forethought along, the losers in our system have been the prospective homeowners, the private renters in the social housing renters. The winners have been the landowners. As it stands, many local authorities have to pay unrealistic premiums for land, based on the estimate of the value of the home value. Too often, it has made unviable for councils to build much needed social housing and infrastructure, and that has to change as this bill will ensure it does.

Madame Deputy Speaker, as we heard in this debate today, there are honourable members that want to find new and creative ways to argue against the need for new housing. But that has failed, the status quo has failed us. If we are serious about tackling the housing crisis, we need serious reform. This bill will deliver it and can be the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

catalyst for change. I refer members to my register of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I refer members to my register of interest. At the first Baronesses interest. At the first Baronesses question time in July last year, I asked the Prime Minister to reassure my constituents they would have a meaningful say over the new
20:00
Lewis Cocking Portrait Lewis Cocking MP (Broxbourne, Conservative)
-
-
meaningful say over the new developed of the greenbelt in their area. He said the government will work with communities, but this bill could not be further from that promise. We are seeing housing targets go through the roof in rural areas, as greenbelt protections are removed, my local councils, the targets are going by more than 20% and in the district specifically, almost double. Protections for unrestricted around the villages is worrying for the constituents that live in those villages, as the unique character and historic charm could be lost forever.

At the same time, targets are coming down in London. When I having a structure to London. When I having a structure to cope. Deputy speaker, these plans do not add up. In this bill, however, there is something I can agree with the government on full in the explanatory notes, that say limited infrastructure is having a real cost to the lives of working people, and I completely agree. It is far too common for new housing to be built without the increasing public without the increasing public

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He makes an excellent point on key infrastructure. Not only are we waiting for GP surgeries in my waiting for GP surgeries in my citrusy but we need a sewage upgrade citrusy but we need a sewage upgrade full stop can we, we can't even have full stop can we, we can't even have new homes put in. Until infrastructure is put in place you cannot build homes on these news areas.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

areas. My honourable friend makes an excellent point and she's right. Infrastructure must come first. There is nothing in this bill that makes developers put that infrastructure in first. We have already had more of our fair share of development. Thousands of new homes have been built in my constituency but new or expanded infrastructure to take the strain of overstretched services is nowhere to be seen. This is having a serious impact on my constituents. The health minister has admitted to me that patients trying to see their local GP are more likely than the national average to wait two weeks.

Drivers are forced to sit in traffic as roads clog up and I hear time and time again that parents are unable to get the child to the local school they want. This bill before us seeks to make it easier to build major infrastructure. Of course I support the building of roads, airports, and runways quicker, but what the government defines as major infrastructure is way too narrow. What is made infrastructure to my constituents is whether they can get a GP appointment or a school place.

I see no mention of that in this bill. There's nothing about providing new powers for local councils to ensure that kind of infrastructure is in place before new housing is built. I had to fight extremely hard to get the NHS round the table to tell them that we desperately need a new surgery to meet the demand from existing residents, but they would not listen to me and now the government is forcing us to build even more. In December the housing minister said he was considering what more we could do to ensure we get infrastructure for development upfront.

But where is this within the bill? This is how you get existing residents on side and you get people behind the development that we desperately need in the right location. Local councillors are having more of their power and responsibility in planning taken away. This dilutes local accountability and in deciding what is built in local area and it is an attack on local democracy was up the Minister should be taking on developers not local communities and councils. I have sat on the committee and the reason the process is sometimes so long and so owner us on the developers is because they try and build up to rubbish.

Some of the stuff that they put forward is utterly disgraceful. Of course we have to have a robust process because we need to focus more on urban design. Simply making it easier for developers to get through the planning system, you are putting way too much trust on developers to build appropriate communities with all of the infrastructure that our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

residents need. I thank her honourable Friend. Does he agree with me that with Does he agree with me that with regard to good quality design, it is not just society but particularly not just society but particularly the government and its relationship with developers has to shift their mindset away from seeing development as a cost and instead seeing it as as a cost and instead seeing it as an investment that will reap benefits in the form of better quality life for residents?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

quality life for residents? I know my honourable friend is a passionate advocate for urban passionate advocate for urban design. Makes an important point. Of course we have to increase urban design because it is the council and us as MPs. If you don't plan a development correctly, with the right number of car spaces, then there are issues and people try and park the car. Our inbox gets clogged up with all of those issues. The council gets extra pressure, so we really have to think about planning the communities rather than just the communities rather than just saying, we will give in to the developers, they say takes too long to be will make it quicker and just rely on them to create places that people want to live.

I have sat on the planning committee and I've seen elements come forward that are utter rubbish. We need to change the mindset of developers, and we must ensure that we have good design. The government aren't seeking to change that, they are committing to a target that can only be achieved by rushing infrastructure of low quality homes with no plans for those who live there. The government needs to focus more on the communities that we are trying to build within this country rather than specific targets and housebuilding across the country.

This bill reveals that the Labour government have got its priorities wrong. Local people should have the largest influence over their new housing element and where it goes and when it happens in their communities, not ministers in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Whitehall. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. I am surprised to hear the honourable member for Broxbourne trashing hard-working local builders trashing hard-working local builders in his constituency and calling the homes that his constituents living homes that his constituents living dreadful trashy houses. Before I dreadful trashy houses. Before I came to this place, no I'm not going to give way. Before I came to this place, Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Point of order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Point of order. I wish to seek your advice on how to approach this because I've just been quoted by saying something I did not say within my speech. I was
20:07
Rachel Taylor Portrait Rachel Taylor MP (North Warwickshire and Bedworth, Labour)
-
-
did not say within my speech. I was talking about developers and my time on the planning committee when developers come forward and propose

**** Possible New Speaker ****

utter rubbish I did also the house is my residents living were rubbish. The honourable member has made

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member has made his point. He is now on the record. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. Order, that is not a point of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, that is not a point of order. I have a moral and clear. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. Before I came to this place I was a property solicitor, and I cannot tell you how many times I had tell you how many times I had developers in my office swearing and cursing at yet another one of their projects being put on hold because of an arcane planning system. Tunnels only the half of it. I will never forget the day developer told me that Warwickshire County Council had asked him to build the pavement outside his new development but the council had refused to let him put traffic lights up to enable the works because there was a vaccination centre 1 mile up the road.

After months of legal wrangling is delayed to homebuyers from moving in. The county council eventually gave in. But not before wasting everyone's time and resources. There are already half a million fewer young homeowners since 2010, and millions are stuck in expensive poor quality and insecure rented housing. Yet despite this, planning permission dropped to the lowest on record under the last government. Because the planning system is outdated and no longer fit for purpose. I want my constituency to be a place that young people feel that they can put down roots, whether it is in our towns and villages.

And I want to ensure there is the necessary infrastructure for them and their young families create a life in our towns and villages. I welcome today's bill to fix our broken planning system and get Britain building again. As a solicitor, I found there were so many occasions that there were unacceptable delays in determining planning applications which costs money for developers. There were insufficient resources to deal with complex legal agreement or consult in a meaningful way about necessary infrastructure. All too often developers bypassed the correct processes only to end up with whole estates built that key approvals, that are now sitting empty for more than 12 months after they were built because access onto the road has not yet been sorted.

This bill will properly fund planning department, I hope this will extend to the associated legal work. It is rare that developers even go down the route of getting new roads adopted because of them delays this causes our financial risks they cannot take. This leads to more and more residents paying freehold management charges which new homeowners can ill afford. I'm glad that the National Infrastructure Commission has welcomed this bill calling it broad and bold package of measures. After years of the party opposite letting the planning system crumble, a bold approach is exactly what is needed.

Just last week I met with the National Grid in my constituency for top they welcome the bill and said this sort of sensible approach could not come soon enough. Of course it is crucial for us to get the balance right. Most people I have spoken to understand that if they want their kids to be able to afford a home and live nearby, we need to build more houses. I agree with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors who say this bill provides a necessary balance between the need to boost building development whilst protecting the natural world through a Nature Restoration Fund.

Driving green initiatives. It is vital we get this balance right. Every person

**** Possible New Speaker ****

should have access to affordable home and green and natural spaces they can use and enjoy. Point of order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Point of order. I appreciate being able to write on a point of order. I would like to
20:11
20:12
Claire Young Portrait Claire Young MP (Thornbury and Yate, Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

the honourable Lady for putting her clarification on the record. I now call Claire Young. Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. I speak today as a former unitary authority councillor over 17 years. I spent a lot of time on behalf of the local community are planning meetings to understand the important of including communities in decisions. Otherwise the process breeds resentment and this is the chance to take account of local knowledge to make sure the developers are of good quality. I'm proud that councillor Mr Shylet reversed the previous Conservative changes that gave one councillor priority to hear, giving local people but the voice was not I'm dismayed that this government wants to give the Secretary of State sweeping powers to enable planning decisions that bypass planning committees and urge them to look elsewhere to speed up delivery.

It is vital if the structure is provided and it is here I would like to highlight a particularly fruitful avenue for a government that says it wants to tackle lockers. Not only can organisations like National Highways be slow to respond to planning consultations, both in individual applications and strategic plans, when they do respond, the answer can be no. Instead we need such bodies to see their role to be one of working with local planning authorities, to overcome the barriers and to be the enablers of growth.

Junction 16 and 17 on the M5 in my constituency are good examples of where joint working to deliver the infra structure improvement needed and which can unlock growth and what residents are crying out for. On the subject of infrastructure, my constituency has great potential for national energy infrastructure. Whether that is SMRs all tidal lagoons. One of my honourable Friend earlier referred to the community benefit of transmission infrastructure, albeit he referred to derisory levels. I would like to see this benefits extended to other energy in.

Finally as a former council leader I understand the pressure on budgets. I know that under the current regime, council taxpayers are paying a significant amount of money towards the planning determination process rather than the cost falling on the applicants. I welcome the provisions in the bill to allow local planning authorities to set their own planning fees. I will also like to highlight that there is room to help local authorities reduce costs. For example local newspapers with their dwindling circulations are costly and ineffective reach to publicising applications.

Clause 84 only tweaks what needs to be published in those newspapers. I urge the government to consider other ways to raise awareness such as councils consulting local groups. To conclude, I urge the government to think again, tackle the real barriers to delivery.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She mentioned local newspapers.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She mentioned local newspapers. That is a lifeline to local people and many people cherish the local paper as a way of finding out what is going on. I hear what she's saying but let's not be too fast and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

saying but let's not be too fast and I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for his intervention and if the government would like to support the future of local newspapers in this way, I hope they will look again at how they are supporting councils to fund the local planning departments. So, to conclude, as the government to think again, tackling the real barriers of delivering and putting local communities at the heart of the planning process.
20:16
Adam Thompson Portrait Adam Thompson MP (Erewash, Labour)
-
-
Like so much of the Midlands, awash as we know and understand today was born of the Industrial Revolution. It was transformed from a historic market town, from a place of hard serious industry, Long Eaton was scarcely a village before the coming of the canals and railways. Good jobs, thriving town centres, proper communities, it is still very much in living memory. At the heart much in living memory. At the heart of the East Midlands, halfway between Derby and Nottingham, what it is now is a place of immense potential.

And with this bill, Madame Deputy Speaker, I believe we can unlock that potential, unleash prosperity, spur economic growth and help deliver national renewable, creating jobs and homes that the constituents of this country needs. It was an industrial giant, employing 10,000 people. 10 years on from its closure, from the largest brownfield site in Derbyshire, new Stanton Park arises from the rubble. Every time I drive past, new work is being done on the park. You -- New work has been taken but is taking too long.

The planning process, the time and insecurity involved, has serious, direct and negative impact on the business's ability to grow. My constituency has not met its housing targets since introduced in 2011, not once in the last 15 years, this problem as part of a decades long national failure to build enough new homes. Which has resulted in a housing crisis, named by some as the worst in the developed world. As a result, the cost of buying a home has risen exponentially, rents are ever-increasing, the average age of first-time buyers is rising consistently, from the peak, where homeowners represent more than 70% of the population just over 20 years ago, homeownership has fallen by nearly 10%.

Most disturbing to me, Madame Deputy Speaker, the borough council now has a social housing waiting list of more than 5,000 people. Around 2,400 households. people. Around 2,400 households. This is a staggering failure of the state recently, I had the pleasure of showing my right honourable friend, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, around 50 new social homes built on a brownfield site in Long Eaton. What this site represents is excellent work by my council colleagues, but it is not enough. 50 new social homes is a property in the ocean, when you have got 2,000 families waiting to move in.

For too long, Madame Deputy Speaker, politicians locally and nationally have gone to stopgap measures. Trying to trigger the symptoms but falling short of a cure. People might not like it, it is difficult, nobody is denying that. But the solution is simple, we have to build more new homes. For the young families wanting to settle down. To the renters, tired of so much of the hard earned income paying their landlord's mortgage. The 1.3 million households, not people, households and social waiting lists in England alone, we have a moral duty to build new homes.

This bill, Madame Deputy Speaker, is at the very heart of this government's decade of national renewal. If we are going to make Britain a green energy superpower, we need to build the vital infra structure required. If we want to take back our streets, breakdown of barriers to opportunity and build a National Health Service, fit for the future, then we need to unlock economic growth, so the government has the money to properly invest in and restore public services. If we are going to put money back in people's pockets, we need to make it cheaper to buy a home, and if we are going to create good jobs people want and need, that Britain needs to be a more attractive place to invest, grow and do business.

To do all that, Madame Deputy Speaker, we need to make it cheaper, faster and easier to build a better Britain. easier to build a better Britain.
20:20
Ellie Chowns Portrait Ellie Chowns MP (North Herefordshire, Green Party)
-
-
You will know that I like to start by emphasising where there is common ground and agreement, so we can start off on a positive foot. So, I do agree there is a housing crisis, I do agree we need to build more homes. We also need to tackle the outrageous inequality in the housing market and the fact there is nearly a billion empty homes, as well as 1.5 million for which we have done a permission and are as yet unbuilt. But still, we need to build more homes.

The right home in the right place, at the right price low. I am not sure this bill goes far enough to address those concerns. More areas of agreement, I agree we need to reform planning and strategic approach. I agree we need to tackle the energy -- Issues of home value, energy and the structure, and indeed, filing fees. So many areas, the Minister is smiling, I can see. However, not going to stop there, sorry! There are a number of areas of, I would say, missed opportunity, as well as fairly deep concern, in relation to the bill in front of us today.

Currently, the bill has no content on a range of important aspects. It doesn't contain any measures to secure affordable healthy homes. It doesn't contain measures to ensure the planning system is fully joined up with our climate and nature obligations. There is even a statement of a positive visionary purpose about the purpose of the planning system. So important to provide the framework of what we are providing here. So, it should be sustainable, benefiting future generations as well as meeting today's needs.

We joined a policy and new climate and nature duty, and all planning authorities, to make sure all policies tackle our climate change act 2008 and our Environment Act 2021 obligations, because planning is crucial for tackling the climate crisis, reducing the environmental impact of new development. Solar panels on roofs, high levels of insulation, zero carbon eating, nothing in here, embodied carbon, nothing in here. I find it extraordinary, Madame Deputy Speaker, that in 160 pages of bill, there is not a single mention of the word flood or flooding, this is so crucial in relation to planning and infrastructure for but we need to ensure that the bill plans also for active and public transport.

Let's see a no net new traffic growth test, applied to all development. So, we ensure we incentivise the shift to active in public transport. Nature, again, the bill should Duty. An opportunity to specify wildlife in the design. Swift bricks that I have talked about previously four hedgehog highways. Green roofs. A new chapter of the Building Regulations specifically on biodiversity. But think about the environmental delivery plans. While I recognise these could be useful in some cases, I'm worried they may be too much of a blanket approach.

What is suitable for newts is not necessarily suitable for all aspects of wildlife, and indeed landscape. I do have a little bit of a concern that we are effectively basically outsourcing the environmental obligations of developers to Natural England, without the requiring of attention to these issues for some the removal of site-specific survey requirements means we will effectively be shooting in the dark when we are specifying what remedies need to be taken. We need to legally guarantee the nature benefits will significantly outweigh any harmful supper to follow the mitigation hierarchy, strengthen protection for irreplaceable habitats, those ancient woodlands and chalk streams that have already been mentioned, and indeed, removing the viability taste test for the naturist levy.

Because otherwise, there is a real risk developers will escape paying for the Nature Restoration Fund they should do altogether. We need to ensure accessibility standard, and affordability standards. affordability standards.
20:24
Joe Powell Portrait Joe Powell MP (Kensington and Bayswater, Labour)
-
-
Nothing symbolises the drift and decline of the past 14 years more than the appalling state of planning and infrastructure in Britain. A housing crisis has forced children to live in overcrowded and unsafe homes, an energy crisis that has left us dangerously exposed to shocks in the global energy market, and the litany of infrastructure failures. Not just the reservoirs, not just the 120 million on the Tory back tunnel for HS2, but also the promised 40 new hospitals by 2013.

A claim now exposed as fiction, with funds not allocated, many schemes, not new hospitals, and a tiny fraction due to complete on time. I can see in my constituency of Kensington and Bayswater what impact this failure has had on my residence. He seems to have missed the line on the spreadsheet, which is the number of times the previous government met the housing target, which is precisely 0. There are nearly 3,000 house was on the rating list.

How, and over 2,000 and temporary accommodation for stopping behind those numbers are stories of daily struggle. Look at her five children, her son is in a wheelchair and awaiting open-heart surgery for his condition. There is no heating, no reliable hot water, and just one working bathroom. They have in waiting over three years for a move to a suitable property. Their sexual daughter has autism and is trying to jump out of a window twice, yet despite repeated, the family remains in housing.

A constituent I met recently but spent years in a burrow with children, before moving back, that is thousands of children living in temporary accommodation in England, the highest number on record. Instead of tackling the root causes, which this bill seeks to do, we have poured money into managing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the property. my honourable friend makes an excellent point about temporary excellent point about temporary accommodation and lack of housing, and availability in temporary accommodation, but why have the housing targets, from London, where we have some of the highest levels we have some of the highest levels of social housing accommodation not met, why haven't those housing targets been raised to deal with the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

targets been raised to deal with the overcrowding we see in places like London? Thank you for the point. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for the point. The housing target is 18,000 for London. She will well know that the previous target was never remotely close to being hit under the previous government. And with targets not being hit, we are interested in is net new dwellings, affordable and social housing for people in back assiduously, that is what this bill will help to do for some and I'm delighted we finally have a government that has the ambition to tackle this problem. If we take energy, I'm pleased this bill will deliver faster more certain planning consent for critical infrastructure, including upgrading our electricity networks and maximising new clean energy sources.

The bill will move. Size of the on from the era of the onshore wind ban, turning -- Plummeting investment, and Putin and his oligarchs if we are serious about speeding up delivery, we must address the capacity crisis in planning departments. It is welcome the government has committed to 300 new planners I must ask the Minister what assessment has been made of the actual total need for planners across the country, to get to the approvals level we need to beat our housing targets. And whether the planning for reforming the bill -- Planning reform in the bill, we know it must be matched by the people and resources needed to make it work.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank him for his speech and highlighting the gaps that exist in local government. He with me I am sure will recognise that the Local Government Association and the Housing Federation has said that Housing Federation has said that only 80% of local authorities have the capacity at the moment in fact,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the capacity at the moment in fact, it could be far less photo does he agree with me that is a real concern? I couldn't agree with her more,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I couldn't agree with her more, that is why the cost, the fee setting, the devolution of fee setting, is so important and that should enable improvement in the capacity of planning departments as a training for councillors one planning committees to make those decisions effectively. I also want to thank all the resident associations in my constituency who put time and effort into engaging in the planning system, and who are passionate about making it work for our community. Their role will continue in the local plan, and in the applications that rise to the planning committee.

Unlike some of the scaremongering we have heard in this debate. So far. This bill sits alongside the other measures, other housing measures, the government is taking. And they are crucial. The biggest investment in social and affordable housing and regeneration. Reform, stronger protection for renters, the home standard, the implementation of this law, but we three are serious about tackling the housing crisis, this ambition must be reflected in the spending review. This is not just day-to-day spending. It is long-term public investment, exactly why the Chancellor took the bold decisions in the budget, to increase the capital available for investment, and reverse over a decade of underinvestment and short-term is I would also welcome any class occasion the Minister can give the total need from the CSR needed, to meet the housing targets, particularly on the social component.

Advancing this bill, alongside new investment in the CSR, could be transformative. The constituents I mentioned earlier, to the thousands of children trapped in unsuitable and unsafe housing, to get this right. It will be a landmark legacy of this Labour government, to finally get Britain

**** Possible New Speaker ****

building again. I will try to get everybody in,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will try to get everybody in, but if interventions are taken then some people are going to lose out
20:31
Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty MP (Huntingdon, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

being called, keep that in mind. The aspect of this bill would like to focus on is the infra like to focus on is the infra structure project reform. This Labour government claims the reforms will make targeted impactful conventions to the system but that will come as scant consolation to those on the receiving end of what has been. On them. It is overly clear how difficult this proves another gate for the average person, the government appears determined to Mike even harder.

They are moving the goalposts to reach the ideological aims and it is my because it was paying the price without being heard, they are receiving nothing in conversation as a result, no firm of commitment to energy bills, with the government assessing pricing, no firm commitment to assuring benefit funds, too, said local communities. Since I last year, this Labour government has forced through six solar initiatives compared to three in the previous governor, the largest of the three was 1,200 acres. The smallest solar farm improved by this government was 1,400 acres, the largest so far, 2008 acres.

The current threshold persona developed is only 50 MW, the same since 2008. Whilst the government has legislated to raise the threshold from 50-100 MW, this is a laughably low bar, 2.717, of the National policy statement set in solid form is required to .4 acres for output. Such a low threshold allows hundreds of acres of good quality farmland to be brought into scope. Cambridge is seen as a target rich environment. We have others in the county and now the Pharma a 20 Nearly 75% of the site is graded as most versatile land.

In answer to a written question about how many consider nationally significant infrastructure projects used greater than 50% land, I was taught by the energy minister in his place there are no nationally infrastructure projects have been consent which we use greater 50% estimates first agricultural land. Last week I challenge the Secretary of State on the same point, quoting that he should ensure that applicants don't state their scheme without justification. He suggested the decision-makers would look closely at the issues but will they? The government has pledged to achieve a target, move the goalposts make the target easier to achieve, stacked the deck in its favour an expensive local resident suggesting the goal is going to require energy systems to fire on all cylinders.

The government will remove the requirement to consult category three and be up to make a claim under the compulsory purchase act while maintaining the notification of the accepted stage. The first one about the land taken under them after an application is a really accepted. The illusion of statutory consultation is nothing more than lip service. For the questions I've asked, I've not once had a response from the government, the views of local people will be taken into account, nor had the highest graded land will be protected from development and I know the Deputy Prime Minister in her opening said .

She gave no details on that and I be interested to hear what the government will do. It's potentially telling that the forthcoming Seller roadmap will not recover until after the spill has progressed, yet again it appears this government will do anything to achieve this Panda change without any thought to the consequences. This bill requires national policy statement is to be updated every five years, those providing policy guidance on energy infrastructure were published in January 24. This should mean they won't be updated until 2029, the build process is punk and make changes to it outside the rhythm of these updates.

Given the clear desire of the government to force it wherever possible, my concern is that this government has been given a window of opportunity to implement rolling tweaks in order to manipulate the process to better suit their own agenda.
20:34
Jeevun Sandher Portrait Dr Jeevun Sandher MP (Loughborough, Labour)
-
-
Allow me to rise and speak on this bill that will allow us to invest in our communities and also in how we can ensure this investment benefits every part of the country and not just London. I've spent my entire adult life in a no growth economy where costs rose because we did not build enough. The rent we pay, our rail fares, energy bills, all have soared because we could not build the homes, rail or wind farms we need.

Higher costs caused by a planning system whose default answer is no. While today, this bill changers that answer to yes. This bill ties constraints that have stopped us from growing. Prices our information and where prices are high, you could see that we desperately need more supply. Rents as a share of income are by 20% since -- are by 20% since 2020. Transport costs 20 high Olympian nations, and when Putin invaded Ukraine, the highest electricity bills in the G7.

And what do these prices tell us? Not enough homes, not enough rail, not enough clean energy. Infrastructure held back by our broken planning system. Our infrastructure is amongst the most expensive and slow as to build amongst high income nations. This bill lifts those constraints and helps get us building. But it can go further. The NICs states the largest increase to the planning timetable is in the pre-application stage. Over two years on average, it's delaying critical infrastructure. And I hope the Minister will address this in his remarks.

Now we need to also ensure that the benefits of this bill are felt across our nation. My constituency is in the East Midlands. Transport spending the lowest in the country, private rents rising faster than anywhere else, productivity the lowest in England. That's why it's hard to get a good job. Now for too long investment has flowed into London and the south-east, and that's because the benefit cost ratio in the Greenberg has a hardwired London bias. Wages are high in London so the estimated benefits of spending are also large in the capital.

It means more projects built here in means more projects built here in London, the lodging becomes the logic becomes self fulfilling. That London bias is why the gap between London and the rest of the UK is larger than the gap between West and East Germany. The Treasury to their credit do understand this problem. But the tyranny of the benefit cost ratio is sadly still with us. We must end this bias and build prosperity in the places that need it most.

Now the party opposite spoke about levelling up, but they did nothing to deliver it. The Leeds tram, upgrading Cardiff to Swansea, electrifying the Midlands mainline, all rejected by the last government that put London first and everywhere else last. They spoke of levelling up because my dad likes to say, talk is cheap. Now is the time to stop building, to stop talking, and start building. Fixing the planning system so we can build the homes, the windfarms, and yes the pylons that we need.

And if we change our approach to infrastructure, we can also build the roads and rail we need outside of London, making it easier for goods and people to get around for my constituents in Loughborough, and the villagers. Thank you.
20:38
Dave Doogan Portrait Dave Doogan MP (Angus and Perthshire Glens, Scottish National Party)
-
-
I'm pleased that the great majority of this bill won't affect me or my constituents, but I will speak briefly, no need to thank me, to the clauses that do, beginning with 9.10, 1112 and 13 on the electricity networks connections reform. I Sibley asked the Minister to acknowledge the first-come first-served the buckle has served development and drawdown of the schemes very poorly indeed. But I asked the Minister when will the regime actually materially change, such that properly consented properly financed projects which are behind projects that aren't either of those things can get their connections approved? Moving to clause 14, consent for generating stations and overhead lines, we see that that amendment to the electricity act 1989 is to make it clear that consenting electricity infrastructure in Scotland is carried out by Scottish ministers and not the secretary of state.

That's all fine and well and good, however further down, we see that appeals would need to be made within six weeks of indecision being published for sub- challenges will be made to the House of the Court of session at Edinburgh. That's all fine, but whether Rita appealed to the Supreme Court and the United Kingdom, so can the Minister confirm that the final arbiter of any disputes over these consenting overhead lines on generating stations will be made here in London? On clause 21, cap and floor mechanism, the Minister and touched to see he's come in for my contribution, the energy minister, he mentioned this to him before, the cap on floor mechanism for electricity storage is vital for tracks as plans and SSE's plans for glass in Scotland.

I know his track one and try to projects give me some concern. Can we have some reassurance that the 2030 deliverable projects will be facilitated without delay by the clause and the ambition of those clauses? And on clause 22, benefits for whom the electricity transmission project, this is bordering on insulting. That if the utility of your home and your area and the value of your home and your area has been significantly impinged by the direction of a pylon nearby, that somehow £25...

Sorry, £20.83 a month off your electricity bill is going to ameliorate that. It's referred to as a financial support scheme. The implication being that people need financial support. They don't need it. Compensation, ministers should call it what it is. It's compensation for the imposition of electrical infrastructure, which in all reality communities have very little locus over whether that happens at all. £20.83 p a month off your electricity bill will be precious little conversation for people who have been mired in the planning process of a pylon line or any other generating infrastructure when they can't sell the property for the last two years and they won't be able to sell the property for the coming two years.

I'm not saying this infrastructure shouldn't be built. I'm saying that the government shouldn't insult people's intelligence with vastly less than the money the government took off them in the rain -- Winter Fuel

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Payment. Is making an excellent point and a rare moment of unity I would a rare moment of unity I would suggest between myself and the honourable member. Does he agree honourable member. Does he agree with me that the conversation is not enough, and I absolutely agree with him on that, but part of the problem is the developer, in our case ScottishPower, energy networks you are building the pylons across my constituency assume they are going constituency assume they are going to get the consent, assume they will get it approved so the pressure head and the compensation doesn't really

**** Possible New Speaker ****

matter. I agree with him the conversation is visible and that many people in his constituency and mine who are subject to these installations are pretty much resigned no matter what they do or say it's going to happen. And I asked the Minister as well to confirm that where constituents are subject to multiple developments, is that 25... £250 per year cumulative per imposition on the property? And why is it limited to 10 years? Are they going to come and take the pylons away in 10 years? Why is it limited to 10 years? Because people will see in this clause in the measures, the ambitions that are represented by this clause in the bill, the very minimal that the government can do while acknowledging that this infrastructure is an imposition.

And I don't it's reasonable that people should have a 10 year miserly compensation for a lifetime's imposition at their home. And with that, I will grant you 30 seconds for somebody else.
20:43
Sureena Brackenridge Portrait Mrs Sureena Brackenridge MP (Wolverhampton North East, Labour)
-
-
I welcome the planning and infrastructure bill. It's a bill that reflects the priorities of a responsible government. Committed to tackling the housing crisis, driving regeneration, jobs, apprenticeships, and investment. Whilst protecting our precious green spaces and green belt. This bill will usher a new era of housebuilding, a long-standing issue felt by successive -- failed by successive previous government but one this Labour government will tackle head-on with exciting projects in my constituency of Hampshire North East.

Constituents in Wolverhampton North East know the importance of building more homes. It's a number one emergency in my inbox. Nearly 8,000 residents around Wolverhampton council's housing waiting list. -- Are on. With around 2,600 properties becoming available each month. Nearly 20% of 25 to 35- year-olds are living with their parents, making it harder for young people to find the right time to start their own family. Every day I hear from families struggling to find a place to call home. Renters stuck in poor conditions and young people wondering if they will ever have the chance to own their own home.

The status quo is failing. And it's clear that we need to change. But let me be equally clear, my constituents also know that these must be the right homes in the right places. And that means genuinely affordable houses with the infrastructure to support it. New homes must mean new GP surgeries, school places, and transport infrastructure. Communities cannot and should not be left to cope without the services they rely on. In Wolverhampton North East, we are seeing great examples of just that.

Canalside south is said to regenerate 17.5 acres of former industrial wasteland. Near Wolverhampton city centre. Having This brownfield site will be transformed into 530 energy- efficient homes. The new part village redevelopment is amassing... Outdated with modern two, three and four-bedroom homes. Transforming the project for our community. Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill is a bold and necessary step towards addressing the housing crisis. Supporting economic growth and investing in our communities. It strikes the right balance delivering affordable, high quality homes where they are needed most.

Once protecting our green spaces and ensuring infrastructure keeps pace with development. This is the action of a responsible government. Delivering on its promises for the people we serve. I support this bill and know it will provide security and hope to countless families in my constituency and across the country.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Housing and homes matter but so too does democracy and accountability entry importantly accountability entry importantly local communities and the local
20:47
Wendy Morton Portrait Rt Hon Wendy Morton MP (Aldridge-Brownhills, Conservative)
-
-
local communities and the local environment. This bill scaled back every planning committee in the country and reduces the role of council involvement on decision- making in their local authorities and wards. It creates a major democratic deficit. With councillors unable to have a voice or to have a say when deciding on a developer. This is classic top-down socialism. From a deputy Minister who has herself protested to local councillors in her own constituency to a post of element. -- To oppose development.

This bill aims to expedite development but we must not allow this to come under the expert Green Belt. -- At the expense of our Green Belt and the wildlife it protects because once gone the spaces are destroyed forever. The growing concern around grey belt, the piecemeal erosion of our Green Belt that risks setting a dangerous precedent. Surely the focus should be on genuine brownfield first strategy, unlocking underutilised strategy, unlocking underutilised urban land before reaching for our green spaces.

I urge the government to strengthen the bill, put Green Belt (Protection) Bill nature at the heart of planning and ensure the pursuit of growth never comes at the cost of our environment and communities. On housing targets the top-down approach to housing targets which has been embodied by this government is a disgrace. And places additional pressure on boroughs such as Walsall. Not only is it being asked to do the heavy lifting for areas such as Birmingham, the government has insisted housing targets Walsall rise by an eye watering additional 27% whilst housing targets in Birmingham are reduced by nearly half.

I could save maybe it is because of the current trash that is in labour led Birmingham and mentioned the squeaky blinders but I will avoid doing that today. On town centre and High Street regeneration, this bill does little to prioritise a generation of our town centres -- regeneration of our town centres and high streets. There is no clear strategy to unlock brownfield sites including in town centres, high streets. There are pub sites crying out for development. Nor is there the necessary investment to make High Street renewal a reality.

Let us be clear brownfield first strategy requires more than one word. It means real funding and a clear plan. This bill lacks both. Brownfield sites often require remediation, yet there is no meaningful financial support to bring them back into use. We have seen it work in the West Midlands, we have seen it at a comparative site in Walsall. We saw it under the work of our previous mayor, Andy Street. Another area this bill fails to address is one million planning consents for new homes in this country.

Not one of these proposed new build properties will ever get built if this bill simply makes it easier for developers to drive a coach and horse through our Green Belt. Place making must go hand-in- hand with ensuring we have$$JOIN...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my right honourable friend the giving way. Does she not realise also in addition to the pacemaking it is about making sure pacemaking it is about making sure infrastructure is at the heart of any new development. So those who do move into new places have the GP

**** Possible New Speaker ****

practices, the Doctor surgeries, the facilities they also need? My honourable friend is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend is absolutely spot-on. On this point. Place making has to go hand-in-hand with infrastructure. Making sure there are additional school places and doctors surgeries to support these new homes. Employment, transport also matters as well. Otherwise all we are doing is clogging up our transport systems, clogging up our roads and frustrating our local communities. What is this bill actually doing to address the need to create and foster new communities? Because this is what the bill should be doing.

This is where I think it is really missing an opportunity. Few in this House would say we do not need homes. Homes need to be part of communities. In this current format I really fear this bill is a developer stream. -- Developers dream. It is also a neighbourhood nightmare because it does not do anything to create the communities. To create resilient and sustainable communities where individuals, whether families can grow up and thrive. That is what really we should be seeking to address through big pieces of legislation.

Like this. I think in short there are some good things in this bill but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

actually it is a missed opportunity. Speaking limit is now three

**** Possible New Speaker ****

minutes. Thank you. On behalf of so many of my constituents, builders and
20:52
Amanda Martin Portrait Amanda Martin MP (Portsmouth North, Labour)
-
-
construction companies and Portsmouth North desperately waiting for the chance to have a home and build those homes, I rise today to express my wholehearted support for this planning and infrastructure bill. It is both timely and essential for providing the affordable housing so desperately needed in Portsmouth. The bill represents a decisive step forward unlocking our planning system and propelling Britain into a new era of construction development alongside nature recovery. The housing crisis has been a consistent challenge with many families struggling to find affordable homes in my city for far too long.

This bill aims to facilitate the construction of 1.5 new million homes at 1.5 million new homes by 2030. Streamlining decision-making processes and ensuring development moves swiftly. Under the last government we already lost far too much time and wasted far too much money. By granting councils and mayors greater authorities to seize land for affordable homes were move removing bureaucratic burdens and have long impeded the process and stopped much needed homes. While I commend the government commitment infrastructure development it is imperative we scrutinise the projects that receive national significant infrastructure project status.

A case in point is the proposed Aquind intercourse project I would if approved run through my constituency of Portsmouth North. The project faces huge opposition for several reasons. Environmental concerns and years of nasty -- years of mass disruption. This is not NIMBY is an because it also faces opposition because of the national security risks identified by the MOD due to interconnections, locations near Portsmouth Naval base. Another reason this project proposal is difficult is making financials behind it and the manner with which the SN IP status was obtained.

Aquind is an owner by, owned by a former Russian oil boss who has faced allegations of corruption and misconduct. The co- owners have also made many substantial donations to the Conservative party. Raising questions around the impartiality of the approval process in 2018 under the last government. As I have said the Planning and Infrastructure Bill the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is a welcome amount astride towards resolving -- momentous stride towards resolving our housing crisis but this government must remain vigilant to ensure processes governing in the structure project are transparent, equitable and free

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from undue influence. Our planning system is critically
20:55
Ben Spencer Portrait Dr Ben Spencer MP (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Our planning system is critically important and I believe it should protect against inappropriate of element including on the Green Belt, element including on the Green Belt, it needs to protect and enhance biodiversity. The planning system needs local and aquatic and community impact rather than dictating to communities the government should work with them. We need not only houses but homes. That means infrastructure, it means it means homes, health services and sewers. Whether through infrastructure first making all statutory consultees it has to work.

Planning enforcement must also work. This is an ongoing issue in my patch. Despite recent changes and improvements to it. For the second reading debate I'd like to talk about the changes proposed to the NSIP system and the DCOs. I would like to speak of the experience in my constituency because we have had one complete, we have had one ongoing and we hope to have one in the future. I will start with the one that is finished which is the pipeline project.

Which ended up blocking access to homes, ripping at green spaces with poor communication and no compensation to residents affected. When I asked for compensation the answer was it is not in the DCO. Reform must ensure greater protections for communities who are affected by these projects. The M25 a three DCO which many of you will know because of the closures of the M25, one of which is in Kent is a fantastic project that is going to prove local connectivity -- improve local connectivity.

It has wrecked havoc on my local communities through divergent groups, -- through diversion routes, through paint at roundabouts which has been admitted they were deeply prioritised in favour of other works. It has caused problems of kids getting to school, kids getting to their exams. When I have tried to raise this in terms of getting enforcement, including when I took this to the office of road and rail, no formal investigation has even been opened and it is pretty much impossible to find a meaningful way of engaging when things go wrong.

We hope to have a DCO in the future, we hope we must have a DCO in the future after the River Thames scheme which will massively reduce flood risk to my constituents. We are far less likely to see a repeat of the impact of the 2014 floods. We have had countless rounds of consultation and I am concerned because of the current system the perfect has become the enemy of the good. The threat and problems with local council reform and the impact that will have can the Minister in his windup explain and give advice to people currently going through a DCO process, put one together and ask what they should do given the impact this bill represents.
20:57
Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson MP (Dartford, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. It is a pleasure to speak today to support this much- needed bill to get Britain building infrastructure again. Dartford, the constituency which I have the privilege to represent in this place and serve as a poster child for the need for this bill in the struggle to see the much-needed infrastructure. Our community is locally -- regularly gridlocked by traffic from the Dartford Crossing creating nearly daily misery for residents. This unreliability at Dartford is also acting as a significant blocker on UK growth with huge costs through delays, calculated at £200 million each and every year.

As the commentator, -- is the commentator Tom Whittle recently highlighted in the times back, 36 years ago to put it another way 22 transport secretaries ago, the Lower Thames Crossing first appeared in the Parliamentary records. It is now -- has now been eight years since the former Transport Secretary who is now in the other place confirmed the route and since April 2017 National Highways has run eight separate consultations consulting for more than 400 days. The planning application eventually ballooned to 400,000 pages.

Many years on we now look forward to a positive decision from the Department for Transport this may. A Labour government finally delivering on a much-needed infrastructure project for the people of Dartford. We cannot continue to face the situation where crucial pieces of national infrastructure take this long to reach decisions. It is essential we can deliver new infrastructure if we are to modernise our country, deliver services and unlock growth. We need a system that is clearer and has a degree of predictability for all participants.

That is able to move at pace while providing the right opportunities for local people to influence plans for the neighbourhoods in which they live. Part of the reason so many consultations were needed for the proposed Lower Thames Crossing has been a number of opportunities for judicial review. I warmly welcome the measures in this bill that reduce these opportunities for projects like the Lower Thames Crossing so we can ensure cases totally without merit do not proceed. Before I finish I just want to say I also welcome the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects measures in the bill.

Big-ticket items like the Lower Thames Crossing are delayed again and again, leaving our constituents in my case paying the price in congested roads. All of our constituents doing so in higher energy bills. Can I encourage Ministers and perhaps they can address this in the summing up to think whether the bill could be strengthened even further to speed up and streamline the process to get these critical infrastructure problem -- critical infrastructure project build faster for all of our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have reservations about whether this bill is aims will be achieved through this legislation. Somerset faces a significant need for homes,
21:01
Sarah Dyke Portrait Sarah Dyke MP (Glastonbury and Somerton, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
faces a significant need for homes, especially affordable housing in rural areas first of its crucial the local communities like those in Glastonbury and Somerton have a strong voice and a real stake in the process of shaping the places where they live. So I show my Liberal Democrat colleagues concerns that the government's overly centralised developer led approach won't mandate the nature friendly planning considerations needed to protect our environment or deliver sustainable development infrastructure and housing in a way that meets the needs of local communities.

And it will exclude them from decisions that they should be involved in. The bill looks to introduce the nature restoration levy, requiring developers to meet environment regulations related to protected sites and species. However I feel that Natural England mandated with overseeing this might lack resource, expertise and budget to properly monitor and enforce the nature recovery fund. In addition, these new measures must not place additional unfunded burdens on councils. Local authorities must be fully involved in the implementation to ensure they deliver meaningful outcomes for communities and for the environment.

We must ensure homes don't come at the expense of nature. I'm worried that this legislation fails to do enough to protect rare species. Such as the great crested newt that can be found in Glastonbury and Somerton and lights Kerry man and the aptly named the newt near Castle Cary. The government's manifesto pledged to make changes to the planning system that would create places that increase climate resilience and promote nature recovery. However this bill lacks the detail needed to really protect and support nature.

Instead requirements have so been supplanted by undefined improvement assessments. Planning should support integration between new homes, agriculture and environment, including achieving nature recovery and biodiversity by design. The bill also lacks binding commitment to the land use framework to determine the balance between reproduction and infrastructure creation. This is a missed opportunity to ensure farmers can improve food security, biodiversity and the climate change mitigation is protected. The family farm tax and the decision to close the scheme without notice will threaten the viability of farms in Glastonbury and Somerton and up and down the country.

So farmers will play a key role in achieving many of the ambitions in this, and the bill could have supported the farmers long-term business sustainability, allowing them to optimise their land for multiple purposes and improve profitability, but sadly this is not the case.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Every week and my surgery in Ealing Southall, families 10 and the shocking stories of living in overcrowded rented homes. They show me photos of mould covering the
21:04
Deirdre Costigan Portrait Deirdre Costigan MP (Ealing Southall, Labour)
-
-
me photos of mould covering the walls, for bunkbeds crammed into one tiny room for the whole family, of the space on the kitchen floor where the parents sleep so the kids can have the sofa. And in Southall my stealing I see people sleeping rough in all weathers. This is the human cost of 14 years of Conservative governments ideological decision to halt Labour's affordable homes program and to push people into the most expensive and largely unregulated private rented sector. The left over 100,000 families in temporary accommodation, the highest since records began.

Now the previous government has a lot to answer for and I won't go through it all now. But we need to start working on solutions. And the solution to the housing crisis is simple. We need to build more homes, and we need to build the energy transport and public services infrastructure to support them. This bill today will put an end to the dither and delay we saw from the previous government and will start to get shovels in the ground and children in Ealing Southall off the living room floor.

Labour run Ealing Council already has one of the most ambitious affordable housing programs in the country but with over 5,000 families on the waiting Help. I hope the Minister will consider the specific barriers in London and how councils can be supported in this. But there are certainly lots that can be learned from London where 98% of planning decisions are already delegated expert officers. Ealing has one of the best planning teams in the country, awarded platinum by planning magazine. They are the top London Borough for untimed decisions on major applications and have the lowest percentage overturned at appeal showing they are getting decisions right.

Ealing has also got a local plan based on comprehensive local consultation which is used to guide good quality planning applications. Today's bill will help This and will ensure councils across the country can take a more consistent stream and approach to planning applications and will bring back strategic planning as in London. I welcome mandatory training for members of the planning committee. We will have to look at that in London so it's regionally tailored for the London plan, ensuring councils get the full cost of planning decision costs is very welcome.

Let's have developers pay this, not council taxpayers. Finally the new natural recovery fund will allow for bigger and more effective environmental improvements such as Ealing's new regional Park. The Conservative Party did not believe in affordable homes. Today's bill will bring -- back the builders and not the blockers and will allow us to start building the homes and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

local services people need. I appreciate the government's intention to speed up planning and
21:06
Llinos Medi Portrait Llinos Medi MP (Ynys Môn, Plaid Cymru)
-
-
intention to speed up planning and development process and build the infrastructure we need. We shouldn't be rushing such huge bill given its impact on our communities. Currently under the Planning Act 2008, applications for developing consent orders are nationally planning infrastructure must set out the requirements to ensure this must be carried out robustly. However, clause 4 of this bill weakens those requirements. Under these changes, the report will only need to summarise relevant responses and outline any changes made as a result. Summarising is a dangerous game.

I don't believe summaries have anyplace in decisions of national significance. I am particular concern about the impact this would have on the Welsh language considerations, environmental concerns and the voice of the local people. When it comes to the wash language, there is already a lack of consistency in assessing the impact of developments. This bill may accelerate this problem and weaken protections for the language. Concerns raised by communities by informative impact could be reduced informative impact could be reduced to a handful of bullet points in a summary.

I do welcome the governance recognition that households living near new transmission developments are affected negatively. However, this should go much further than the current proposals. Why is this principle not extended to large- scale energy developments? Take the proposed Mahir project as an example which will cover over 3,000 acres of the islands lands. Large solar farms are built on agricultural land and frequently sought to communities on the promise of economic benefits. Replacing agricultural industry with huge solar farms will negatively impact the local economy.

I recognise the need to improve our energy security and to do this, the government should be focusing on innovative solutions to roll out new And promoting rooftop solar. To close, I urge governments not to rush this bill. It must give confidence to businesses and local communities, must also lay the ground for a more coherent and strategic approach to ensure the development works for the future generations.
21:09
Alex Sobel Portrait Alex Sobel MP (Leeds Central and Headingley, Labour )
-
-
And like to thank the Minister for recognising the urgent need for delivery of homes in critical infrastructure and toboggan plan for 1.5 million homes by the end of the Parliament. My constituency is in desperate need of affordable homes to rent and one day for them to own their own home. In terms of the bills impact on climate, planning should be a powerful lever to tackle nature loss and climate change as well as meeting housing and low carbon infrastructure needs. The government to meet its nature targets, it should integrate nature recovery alongside climate.

Should require planning policy decisions to contribute to meeting our climate and nature targets. We cannot let developers avoid biodiversity net gain responsibilities simply by paying into Nature Restoration Fund, banking money may never be spent on nature. Developers just seeing it as the cost of doing business. The fund offers no guarantee the population protect species be replaced. Analysis by nature space protected species have limited impact on development. More importantly, existing schemes of district licensing accelerator element by shaving months from planning applications.

We need to better promote the existing schemes, acknowledging the Nature Restoration Fund and environment and delivery Fund and environment and delivery It's within the bill scope to ensure the Forestry Commission be given a nature duty with the nature remote, the Forestry Commission can give greater weight to habitat recovery and the woodlands they manage. The planning structure also offers a primary legislative opportunity to bring forward promised reforms. The bill should introduce a nature recovery purpose protected landscapes and introduce the promised reforms. In my constituency we are doing our fair share.

Plan to grow by 50,000 homes in the next decade. However we are at crisis point with 27,000 on the council and housing association waiting list and 7,000 priority branding who have to wait three years to get home. As it stands for local authorities, funding is not fluid enough and settlements are not long enough that councils need to be self-sufficient to cover maintenance and replacement of stock, a big part of the solution to re-implement grant funding target property with a long-term approach to funding to unlock additional opportunities.

Housing investment to be reclassified this infrastructure to support not only the effective use of funding the decent home for the individual and wider economy. I'm asking us to marry together the understanding that environmental law need not be a block to development and listening to community and excellence. But sustainable develop, everyone's access to green space together with the understanding that housing and social housing is infrastructure for local authorities to build and structure our communities of the future. Will the Minister meet with me as he was so kind to on the renters reform bill?
21:12
Olly Glover Portrait Olly Glover MP (Didcot and Wantage, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Housebuilding is essential to provide the homes we need but there are significant problems of our current approach to planning and therefore it is welcome that the government is giving time and attention to these topics. My constituency has seen 35% population growth in 20 years of the area surrounding it. Yet the housing that has been built only meet some of the knees. South Oxfordshire analysis highlights a serious shortage for one or two people households particular. I've personally experienced the challenge of finding suitable and affordable housing with very little to rent that is furnished.

I appreciate very few small violence will be being played , with my salary the small has a reasonable is wildly expensive and nearly £300,000 for a small 2 Bedroom Ter. In my case building new housing has freed up an older House for me to buy the current market is not delivering for people on low incomes. Between 2012 and 2021 the Vale of White horse district was third highest out of local authorities for net increase in dwellings as a proportion of their starting stock. And I'm proud the LibDem led district councils have been proactive developing joint local plans which have successfully combined meeting housing targets at five year land supply requirements with significant state of the sport, for example the CPRE.

The councils innovative and inclusive approach to consultation of the public meant it was shortlisted for three national awards. They ran three stages of consultation to encourage as much engagement as possible and over 5,000 responses were received from residents parish councils and local businesses. But a key concern for my constituency is how any further increase in numbers of houses can be accommodated, given how a lack of investment in infrastructure has dominated in recent years, leading to local concern about further housing. We need targets and measures for infrastructure as well as housing, particular as local authorities do not have the powers of funding to deliver health and major transport schemes, and this bill does not in itself remedy this.

Key infrastructure...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You mention... You mention the cost of the Cost of the infrastructure. Is it not also incredibly important the local councils and local NHS integrated cables are given the increased cables are given the increased budgets to maintain the staffing for those facilities because there is no use building a GP surgery if you can't energy...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

can't energy... I thank him for his intervention and is quite right to highlight that of course buildings need to be sufficiently staffed otherwise it sufficiently staffed otherwise it will end up that episode of yes will end up that episode of yes Minister with an empty building with no patients but loads of staff and building. Key infrastructure needs building. Key infrastructure needs and ask for my constituency included cock relief road and better walking and cycling provision than the current plan.

It's a controversial scheme the one I have given my backing to. Walking and cycling investment in new and existing areas of the town's, new railway station, Didcot Oxford electrification and the health capacity to keep up with our growing population, particularly GP surgery on Didcot great Western Park. And that's why it's so critical that we link housing targets to targets and measures for wider infrastructure because communities do need housing but they also need all the public and private amenities and services that go with them that are essential for happy them that are essential for happy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Many colleagues in the House know I love talking about education but this bill is an opportunity to talk about something even closer to my heart than that. Not neighbours, but my home on Harlow. Harlow is a post-war Newtown, it may not have been the Newtown, it may not have been the first, it may not have been the most successful, not football -wise but I argue it is one with the most hard. The principles that underpin Harlow
21:16
Chris Vince Portrait Chris Vince MP (Harlow, Labour )
-
-
The principles that underpin Harlow were about community. Collective identity and despite it's tragedies I believe it shines through today. I welcome this bill recognises the importance development corporations and I urge the Minister to look at the not so new towns of Harlow and Stevenage like the one I have the honour to call my home and represent in this place. If you speak to some residents of Harlow, let us say the more experienced residents of Harlow they will talk with great fondness about hollow developer and Corporation.

I want to take a moment to recognise those pioneers who made sure they got things done. I also pray -- pay tribute to my predecessor, one of them in this place, Liam Manning. We still have a lie in Manning Centre which cares for some of those more experienced residents and for her vision of what Harlow could be. I welcome the commitment to ensure there is greater link between the developed corporations and local transport authorities. That connectivity is vital. I would also like to draw the Minister's attention to Harlow's neighbourhood centres like Bush fair and the snow.

Before the idea of the city was muted and then I believe by some people misunderstood, Sir Frederick Gilbert recognised the need for every neighbourhood to have a sense of identity. The shopping centre, a central point to meet, work of Hoddle to -- a work of art work of Hoddle to -- a work of art or two, measures which meant you could get from one end of Harlow to the other without ever having to go on a road. No-one will know better about the issues of land banking than the people of Harlow.

Huge swathes of our town centre are no-go zones, left in a state of decay. Abandoned buildings left to rot or refuge of those outside of the law. This needs to change and I believe this legislation will help with that. Contrary to the missing -- to the misleading report this is not about targeting landowners, there is nothing in the bill which changes the core principles of Compulsory Purchase Order but must be used only when negotiations have not succeeded and where there is a case in the public interest.

In conclusion I welcome the government ongoing commitment to building the homes we need. As someone who has worked in the charity sector for homeless charity I know as much as anyone how much they are needed. For every resident who complains about a new housing development I speak to five who are living in overcrowded accommodation, unsuitable accommodation or facing the risk of homelessness.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I am delighted the Deputy Prime Minister has arrived in time to hear Minister has arrived in time to hear my speech. Because I do not question the sincerity or intention of either the Deputy Prime Minister or the planning Minister. With regard to the legislation we have before us the legislation we have before us today. Nor the intentions of the planning changes which are introduced in the revised national
21:18
Andrew George Portrait Andrew George MP (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
planning policy framework. My concern is whether they will actually deliver the target of 1.5 billion. I sincerely doubt they will. The reason why I doubt they will is because as with previous governments. This is not something which is unique to the present government, housing target government, housing target methodology is based on a delusion. The delusion that private developer's will collude with the government to drive down the price of the finished product. The problem is when you look at places like Cornwall, I represent Cornwall and I have worked in this sector during my nine year sabbatical from this place.

If you look at places like Cornwall we have met those and we have exceeded targets. What has happened is we have more than trebled the housing supply and yet the housing problems to local people have got significant ways. Increased to second homes, £500 million of taxpayers money has been handed out to holiday homeowners in the last 10 years by the previous government. When only half of that amount has been put into first-time homes for local people. So what we need as we need targets which are based on delivering for what the communities need.

Problem is our targets are a means to an end. Building homes does not mean you meet the need. If the targets were actually the end than the means, if other words we set targets which were about reducing the needs so the targets were to reduce the need rather than simply to fill the pockets of developers, then we would be in a far better place in places like Cornwall and no doubt over the rest of the country. I hope the Ministers will look again and allow those areas that have struggled in the past, even though they have not met that need, it allows them to set targets to address need rather than develop agreed.

The other thing is the honourable member mentioned the rural exceptions policy which I think is a very good one and can be developed. It should be a planning norm in many rural areas to deliver that need. And compensating for nature loss is something clause 55 of the bill looks at and I think that needs to be strengthened a lot and of nature charities are worried about that. Finally part five about compensation -- about compulsory purchases one which I think needs to be built up to stand behind this.

I would like to see the government deliver and develop. Thank you.
21:21
Jonathan Davies Portrait Jonathan Davies MP (Mid Derbyshire, Labour)
-
-
Britain finds itself in a chokehold of bottlenecks, leaving it unable to update its infrastructure to a modern standard. Part of the story behind this is the last government in Ayrshire and infighting which came at the expense of the national interest. The time it takes now to secure planning permission the major infrastructure is a must double over the past decade. This is as -- this has had real-world consequences with higher bills, huge increase risks to flooding and I could go on.

It is essential when we look at that Victorian post-war sense of purpose which symbolised progress and ultimately delivered improvements to people's everyday lives. The kind of get up and go that made Derwent Valley the power of the Industrial Revolution and cheap Renewable Energy in Wales two centuries before it was fashionable. If we want to see this country punch above its weight we must... Because failure to do so will mean we cannot keep the lights on. Bearing in mind in the short time I will focus my contributions here on those which relate to energy.

There are measures in the bill which will bring a much welcome boost to EV charging infrastructures. Drivers of electric vehicles know all too well the infrastructure is not there to be able to undertake long journeys in many areas. Especially the East Midlands which is one of the fewest proportions of electric charges per hundred thousand people in the UK. I know this investment will be welcome used by the bus operator in my constituency who wants to transfer to electric buses but have had insufficient infrastructure including high cost of connecting to the grid and a lack of adequate charging facilities available locally.

This legislation must be a springboard, not only for embracing the infrastructure we need today but the infrastructure we need tomorrow and I want to see and have worked on hydrogen in infrastructure in the long-term. I also want to speak about people who feel anxious about change. This is nothing new. It is something that is old as time itself people in my constituency do have some concerns about the National Grid proposed pylon upgrade between Chesterfield and Wellington. My asked the government is this, please ensure the National Grid listens to people and makes changes where it is right to do so so it can deliver these projects with respectful communities.

The concerns of communities cannot be dismissed and while we must upgrade our electricity infrastructure to help us transition to net zero, deliver cheaper bills and add energy independence my role in this places to speak for people in Mid Derbyshire and ensure they are heard and respected. However opposing all new infrastructure without collaborating to improve it may feel a victory in the short-term, the costs of failing to step up will be costs which are felt and borne by all, especially the next generation.

Thank you.
21:24
John Grady Portrait John Grady MP (Glasgow East, Labour)
-
-
Final speaker. MP I emphasise how important this bill is for Scotland. Scotland and their economy. We have huge opportunities in the form of offshore wind and floating wind too. This all depends on the element of This all depends on the element of transparent -- the development of infrastructure. It will help us in Scotland get away from expensive gas and get us onto cheaper fixed price wind. Delays in England cost my constituents a lot more money. The builders much more than that.

It modernises the machine the connections to the electors dissolution system, speeding up connection of vital energy projects are energy security. The UK government has worked closely with the Scottish government delivering on its promise to put country first and Scotland first and party second. To modernise the regime for powerlines and generating stations in Scotland. It also makes provision for long duration energy storage. You may wonder what that is? It is all sorts of exciting new technology but also I recommend a visit to the power station crew going to see all about it in the glens of Scotland.

You will see how important it is. It also provides opportunities of British engineering and children in our schools now to pursue careers in engineering. There are also other reforms that are very important to the electricity sector. In Scotland. This may be a historic moment in pointing out some of the agreements between the SNP and the Labour Party in this chamber have however I would not want to be too gentle on the SNP Scottish government which takes part along to consent projects in Scotland.

Far too many projects sit on the Minister's desks for far too long. This is holding back investment. The same applies in Glasgow with the SNP council there. We do need to get going with some of these concerns and MPs need to get a move on with consent and projects to create jobs and benefit my constituents. It will look to the future and create opportunity. This is a bill of aspiration and ambition for our country, for too long we keep saying we can have great elements and create jobs and create wealth.

This bill says let's go for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it and let's create jobs, let's create investment. This bill I supported fully. I am obliged. I now come to the Front Benchers or windup. Shadow Minister.
21:27
Paul Holmes Portrait Paul Holmes MP (Hamble Valley, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

or windup. Shadow Minister. You very much. There have been many eloquent and thoughtful many eloquent and thoughtful contributions in the debate today and I would like to build on and respond to some of the comments made in the debate and there have been great speeches by honourable friends and members from all sides of the House. In particular might I mention the right honourable gentleman, the men of the North East Cambridgeshire. Who like me has some concerns about the bill despite knowing the government does have genuine intentions through the passage of this bill.

But particularly when it comes to giving power to Natural England and a quango were removing other quangos. With some serious questions about the future of resourcing of Natural England and those response are billeted. I hope the Minister will be able to answer some of those questions in winding up. The deputy premised has maintained democracy will be there for local people who want to have their say over planning up occasions but the simple fact is this bill will put the rights of planning committees and local authorities to make the decisions on the local decisions.

My honourable friend, the member for Mid Buckinghamshire has mentioned and I will come to this later in my speech, has mentioned housebuilding being up in rural areas versus urban areas and I will come onto that later but he is right about the challenges he has in Mid Buckinghamshire. And his wider constituency. He is also right to focus on the infrastructure where it is wrong just to focus on renewable, there are thousands of acres up and down this country that could be used to focus on solar power and I feel we should be looking at alternative options in terms of energy going forward as well.

The honourable gentleman, the before Crawley says he was like the member for Crawley the planning bore and he became a planning bore doing his time listen to various memos in the Labour Party. When we were both in opposing student political party that the University of Southampton in not so long ago I will say. He was not a ball then. And I expect that in the speeches he makes going forward he will not be a bore in his career in this House.

I honourable friend the member for Keighley and Ilkley is a strong advocate for his constituency full he is right to say the introduction of EDPs are going -- are good ideas but as the case shows and I will develop the thinking behind this but it does not protect local issues that happen in terms of habitat protection but then just tries to move it somewhere else. My honourable friend the number Bridgwater mention local planning and removing powers is absolutely correct. The use of compulsory purchase order is antidemocratic when it comes to agricultural and.

He is absolutely correct. My honourable friend the member for Mid Bedfordshire recognises as we do, the government Monday to try and build the 1.5 million homes that are required under the legislation going forward. But I have to say to the House that nobody believes there will be able to achieve it. Including the Minister of State within the department. My honourable friend, the member for Bromsgrove and I, it is on the record, my honourable friend the member for Bromsgrove mentioned there is a rural versus urban competition that is being created by this government.

He mentioned there is an 82% uplift in his constituency. My honourable friend the number Broxbourne said targets have doubled in Broxbourne well targets are down in London. I failed to get a single Labour MP to admit the mayor in London is not capable of delivering the numbers. Even though the government have reduced them by a record level. My honourable friend, the men of Huntingdon said there was no details on community improvement funds and solar developments, the threshold was still too low and that needs to be raised.

That is something we will look forward going in committee. My right honourable friend, the member for Aldridge-Brownhills mentioned the Green Belt and the nature of it being at the heart of planning. There is a top-down application in the legislation. I completely agree. My honourable friend last by no means least for Runnymede and Weybridge said DCOs need to be accountable and better suited for local people. We completely agree for were on the side of the House have voiced concerns about the government centralising zeal when it comes to planning.

When they first introduced this bill to the House it cemented many of our fears about the traditional centralising mission which Ministers in this government have shown that tasteful. In various areas of government since they took office. Let's face it that is the Labour Party. While we all recognise that is a need for tangible change to deliver suitable and relevant infrastructure, this should not be at the detriment of the rights and responsive Latisse of locally elected representatives and planning committees or those who now face having their land taken away by this government unfair compulsory purchase order changes.

That is what this bill does. The Deputy Prime Minister said she wanted to streamline decision-making but we all know this bill takes those local I previously said it was fundamentally not good practice or good governance to deliver substantial changes to the National Planning Policy Framework before legislating for an overarching changing planning infrastructure policy. It leads to confusion on the ground, delays in good planning and rushed enforced devolution and local government real connection will further delay and complicate the intended consequences of this bill.

Let us also not forget that the government have now introduced new housing targets which will reclassify land from grey belt and will see areas green lit for development over the objections of local people and local authorities. And this bill will do it on a strategic scale that we have never seen before. Instead of delivering an algorithm which fairly distributes building targets, the government has introduced a politically motivated unfair housing target regime which has opposition councils in its crosshairs, tripling the burden to building in some cases while they reward Labour councils for their failure to deliver in their own authorities.

This reeks of political gerrymandering and the government must think again. The Deputy Prime Minister outlined that she wanted these homes that she will be delivering to be affordable. Can I just remind members on that side of the House that it was her government when she came in the scrapped right to buy, scrap shared ownership and scrapped mechanisms that allow the people in this country to get on the housing ladder? Back to this bill, shared ownership and help to buy... I apologise.

I would like to outline three areas of concern in this bill. Firstly, this legislation threatens to remove local councillors from being able to have their say by setting out a national scheme of delegation that will set out which types of application will be determined by council officers and which should go to planning committees. Rules all made from the desks of ministers in Whitehall but not planning applications that will be able to be decided in the committee rooms at town halls across this United Kingdom.

Indeed as the LGA agreed, and have commented, " There remains concerns around how it will ensure that councils who know the area's best and what they need remain at the heart of the planning process. The democratic role of councils in decision-making is the back bone of English and British planning systems, and they should not be diminished." We agree the government does not. These changes will see rural county areas required to develop 56% more housing compared with the previous government standard method.

This is more than any other local authority type and equates to over 180,000 homes needed to be delivered in counties per year compared to just over 115,000 under the previous method. That's an average a rural uplift of 115% while urban areas with major conurbations, mostly Labour authorities are only up by 17%. And it's a simple...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Rural constituencies, we both know of in demographic crisis in this areas. Does he agree with me this areas. Does he agree with me that young people in rural areas need homes to live in and work from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

need homes to live in and work from and what he and his party have against young people in rural areas? I don't have anything against young people in rural areas at all, young people in rural areas at all, but surely his constituents will not but surely his constituents will not see that it's fair where there is already the infrastructure, where generally housing supply is better generally housing supply is better and where it easier to get that infrastructure through in urban centres and his government have reduced targets on his own authorities but a punishing rural areas across the country.

And it's not sensible or feasible to a very clear problem and will drastically increase pressure on existing rural infrastructure and will override the democratically elected local leaders have a stake in and you should have a say in the developed of their local areas. It also raises the question of how this legislation is deliverable when local government reorganisation or change the spatial divergent strategies of local authorities. It's further concerning that the Chief Executive of homes England has cast doubt on whether the government can realistically meet its goal of 1.5 million homes.

So did the housing minister in a Select Committee hearing last year. Council leaders, developers and even their own experts are warning that these targets are unachievable. And we have a government...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point, does my honourable friend agree with me that one way of actually helping to deliver homes would be to make sure that those who have planning permission are actually built out first? Thus actually built out first? Thus saving the greenbelt and some of our suburban areas and rural areas

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sooner rather than later? They shout from a sedentary position why did we never do it. This is one of the largest planning bills that has come before the House in a number of years, and nowhere has the government mentioned where has the government mentioned where they would force developers to build houses that have already been given planning permission. We have a government which has reduced housing targets in urban areas, where it easier to build duty in existing infrastructure, population density and the availability of brownfield sites.

Instead Labour's reforms to the NPPF and their proposals in this bill have resulted in top-down targets that will silence local voices. They have chosen to prioritise building in rural areas and on the greenbelt rather than focusing where the demand of housing is greatest in our cities and urban centres. And by only allowing councillors to debate and discuss only the proposals that the Deputy Prime Minister and the government defines as large development, local people's voices within the planning system will be eroded.

It will take away the discretion that can be used by planning committees to resolve small and very nuanced decisions. Additionally while the principle of environmental and plans are certainly welcome, and we know this is been looked on favourably by proponents of sustainable development, it's vital that the nature recovery is incorporated into building plans. However it is concerning as was mentioned by one of my Liberal Democrat colleagues that national -- natural England will have its workload dramatically increased. And this uncertainty about whether they have the budget and authority and whether they can bear the burden of these additional response abilities.

Can the Minister outline any assessment his Department has done on the budgetary increases that would be required for natural England and take on the additional responsibilities envisaged in this bill? Furthermore, and most concerning, the government seeks to overhaul the compulsory purchase process, allowing land to be acquired for projects deemed to be in the public interest. And will change them to allow faster land acquisition. However, farmers may be forced to sell the land for its current value rather than its potential worth in developed.

But most diverse a fair might deserve a fair price rather than market price. They already being hammered over inheritance tax and the Sustainable Farming Incentive, the proposed changes to further CPS will introduce a further power imbalance which threatened to override their right to a fair deal. The countryside allowance will give councils more to reduce the... Especially in the context of challenging outlook for farmers and inheritance tax fiasco. This is not about people blocking development, it's about the state paying the market price for land.

We need more houses and more economic development but not at the cost of basic principles. While it's true that tenant farmers will get an increase in any CPO purchases, landowning farmers already facing unsustainable pressure are once again going to be shortchanged by this government's plans to introduce these changes. In conclusion, while the government say they want to deliver more homes, increase affordability, streamline the system and deliver the homes that we need, nobody accepts that they can do it. They give with one hand but have overwhelmingly taken away with another three destroying this country's economy that allows developers and people to build the housing that we need.

And as with any rust piece of work, and as we have outlined today, their plans to threaten to overwhelm the system and in some cases threatens to erode the safeguard in place to encourage sustainable and vital development. And removes local voices from local people, and I look forward to Labour MPs explaining to their labour leaders in their councils why their Labour Deputy Prime Minister take away the local rights as councillors to represent their local constituencies. We will always stand up against excessive government centralisation.

And in favour of local representatives who know their local representatives who know their communities best. We have a duty. A duty to defend pharmacy were stewards of the land, must have their land rights respected, to defend local democracy and the role of local councils who disagree with their power being taken away. With the people out there who want new housing but want local choices for local people. It is clear. The government cannot deliver on that challenge. We will amend this legislation to make sure it delivers for local councillors and local people.

We will improve this bill. The government simply has not.
21:41
Matthew Pennycook Portrait Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. It is a real pleasure to close the second reading debate for the government and I thank all honourable and right honourable members who participated in it. Not unexpectedly has been a debate of contrasts. On the one hand we had the privilege of listening to a large number of well-informed and thoughtful contributions from honourable members who agree with honourable members who agree with In a crowded field I commend in particular the excellent speeches made by my honourable friends the member is the barking, Northampton South, Basingstoke, Welwyn Hatfield, Erewash, Kensington and Bayswater, and Milton Keynes North.

Set against those, we were subjected to a series of contributions from honourable and right honourable members who while professing support in principle for the intentions of the bill, nevertheless alighted on a range of flawed and in some cases spurious reasons why they oppose it. Amongst the most glaring examples of that approach am saddened to say the contribution made by the Member for Taunton and Wellington in moving his party's reasoned amendments that wasn't cited. While I appreciate fully his need to manage the discordant voices on his own benches when it comes to housing and major infrastructure, the arguments he made were both confused and disingenuous.

This government wholly rejects its claim that the bill will not result in the ambitious delivery of infrastructure and housing the country needs, so I say Jenny to the honourable member, a party that declared in its manifesto only last year that it was committed to, " Increasing building of new homes 380,000 a year should be getting behind this legislation, not seeking to block it. And I sincerely hope even at this late stage that the Lib Dems reconsider their position. Among those...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will the Minister accept that it would be easier to spot this bill if it didn't include clauses which provide the Secretary of State with provide the Secretary of State with the power not just to take some decisions away from planning committees but you can -- take all decisions away because they clauses decisions away because they clauses That's not the case and there has been a huge amount of scaremongering when it comes to the provisions in the bill that related planning the bill that related planning committees.

I would deal with that particular point in due course. But among those honourable members who do support the main principles of the bill, there were of course understandable differences of opinion. Some express their unequivocal support for each and every one of its provisions, others conveyed their broad support while arguing for specific changes to be made further measures to be added. But all were in agreement this legislation must progress if we are to streamline the delivery of new homes in critical infrastructure. As the House as a whole ostensibly asserts that we must, and therein lies the crux of the issue.

And the reason I must say candidly at the heart of this, some of the species referred today because we can all professing principle our support for the ends. Doing so is after all risk free first what matters is whether we are prepared in practice to also will the means. When it came to housing in the structure we know the previous government was not willing to do so. Hence the dissonant is in its final years between its data commit to building more homes and its decision in practice to recklessly abolish mandatory housing targets and thereby torpedo housing supply in a forlorn attempt to appease a disgruntled group of its anti-housing backbenchers.

Thankfully this Labour government is prepared to do what it takes to deliver the homes and infrastructure And will fundamentally change how we build things in this country and in so doing, it will help us tackle the housing crisis, raise living standards in every part of the country and deliver on our Plan for Change. During the five hours we debated, an extremely wide range of issues have been raised. I've heard all of them and will seek to respond to as many in the time available, but it won't be up to cover all of them so I would deal with the main themes and issues that been raised in the course of the debate.

And I will begin if I may with the various points made in relation to nationally significant infrastructure. Honourable members made a variety of wines covering issues such as national policy statements and judicial review. But most of the contributions focused in on the changes the bill will make two consultation requirements for NSIP projects. As the hassle be aware the NSIP planning regime was established in the planning of 2008 to provide more certainty on the need for nationally significant projects. In its early years, the However its performance has sharply deteriorated when the time and need for it has increased dramatically.

In 2021 it took an average 4.2 years for a project to secure development compared to 2.6 years in 2012. The documentation has been referred to by a number of honourable members, underpinning concerns and has been getting longer and in 2 million cities now runs to tens of thousands of pages. -- To many cities. Uncertainty about meeting statutory requirement has led to greater risk of urgent and goldplating for the whole process. The costs of delays obviously increase the cost of the projects.

Those costs are ultimately passed on to taxpayers public infrastructure and bill payers and customers private infrastructure. The measures in the bill will provide faster and more certain consenting processes. Stripping away unnecessary consultation requirements that do nothing to improve applications nor meaningfully engage communities. They will to use the phrase used by the member for Huntington, ensure the NSIP regime is firing on all cylinders. I want to make clear the measures in the bill are not the limit of our ambitions when it comes to streamlining the NSIP regime.

I have noted in the course from a number of honourable members who have spoken today to address the significant elongation of pre- application periods resulting in the way from which statutory procedures are now being applied. This is an issue to which the deputy Minister and I have really given a significant amount of thought. I commit to giving further consideration to the course were using the bill to address statutory requirements that will appear to be no longer driving outcomes. I can assure those honourable members the government will not hesitate if there is a compelling case for reform in this area.

Large numbers of honourable members touched on the nature of restoration funding. We are fully committed to making sure this development contributes to natures recovery delivering a win- win for nature and the economy. We will be taking three steps to deliver on our new approach. First moving responsibility from identifying actions to addressing environmental impacts away from multiple project specific assessments to a single strategic assessment delivery plan. Second moving the responsibility for planning and implementing strategic actions onto the state will stop deliver to organisations with the right expertise and with the necessary flexibility to take actions most effectively deliver positive outcomes for nature.

And third allowing impacts to be dealt with strategically in exchange for financial payment. Development can proceed more quickly. Project level assessments are limited only to those harms not dealt with strategically. To those honourable members who raised concerns these provisions will have the effect of reducing the level of environmental protection of existing environmental -- of the existing environment I will assure them that is not the case which is attested to in section 20 statement on the face of the bill in the name of the deputy Minister.

Overall we are delivering positive outcomes for protective sites and species. They are the result of significant engagement across the developing sector, environmental groups and nature service providers. That is why the bill's introduction we saw a wave of welcoming this approach for a win-win approach for nature and development. Concerns were raised about how quickly we will be able to implemented plans. We are confident we will get EDP is in place fast and why we want to see the first EDPs prepared alongside this bill and operational for developers to use shortly after Royal assent.

We are also looking for opportunities to provide upfront funding so we can kick of action in advance of need with costs recovered as develop and comes forward. This will allow us to get shovels in the ground and unlock homes and infrastructure more quickly. Lastly on this point the right honourable member for North East came to raised concerns about the CPO powers to Natural England. If we are going to be... It is vital Natural England have sufficient powers to deliver conservation measures required.

Compulsory purchase is just one tool and we would expect Natural England to consider such powers as a last resort subject to appropriate scrutiny and oversight including authorisation by the Secretary of State. More broadly the restoration fund will provide more opportunities for developers to work with Natural England and improve a Green Spaces Bill generation to come. I say to the honourable gentleman this is not a radical change. Many public bodies with statutory powers of public purchase. As he should be aware of all people health service bodies and some executive agencies like homes England.

I want to touch on planning committees before concluding. Several honourable members raised concerns with plan to modernise and indeed some suggested our reforms are tantamount to removing democratic control from local people. That is simply not the case. I say to the shadow Secretary of State residents would lose the opportunity to reject the planning -- to object planning location. That is incorrect. They will still be able to do so in the way they can now I will give way. Ueki I am very grateful.

--

**** Possible New Speaker ****

How is that comparative do his comments that said it is for elected councillors on the most controversial obligations. Which he is going to dictate. Will he at the very least publishes Russia Regulations on what he intends through this clause, clause 46 alongside the passage of this bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

alongside the passage of this bill? I will address that specific point in due course. They are entirely consistent. We want to make entirely consistent. We want to make decisions were planning committees will determine but they will be able to object planning occasions in every instance as they can now planning is a local activity. This covenant has made it available at every opportunity and is a plan which must remain in terms the planning system local plans are the best ways for communities to shape decisions about the way to deliver the housing and wider development in the areas that are needed and we want more people involved.

We are going to make progress if he does not mind. We want more people involved in the developed of local plans. The measures and the story planing -- remaining to planning issues will surely mean -- will mean planning is most remote and efficient. I have been a local Councillor and I have sat on planning committees in the past as I know many honourable members in this House have. We all know the significant room for improvement in how they operate. So it is disappointing to hear honourable members betrothal to sensible proposals for modernising the local planning system as a fundamental attack on local democracy when they are anything but.

Decisions about what to build and where should be shaped by local communities and reflect the views of local residents. Democratic oversight of planning decisions is essential. It is also vital planning committees operate as effectively as possible. Planning committees need to be focused on key applications for larger developers, not small-scale projects or niche technical details. The bill will ensure they can play a proper role in scrutinising without obstructing while maximising the use of experienced professional planners. Happily.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would just like to seek some clarity from the Minister if I may on that where he is saying local councillors will be able to councillors will be able to scrutinise but they would not actually be able to stop is the point I want to probe with him. A point I want to probe with him. A planning application if it was a large-scale one?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

large-scale one? No she has misunderstood me. Planning committees will only be able to scrutinise and make decisions on a series of decisions on a series of applications and the House should also be aware and I think this is a point raised by the shadow Secretary of State, we intend to formally consult on these measures in the coming weeks so honourable members will be able to engage with the detail and precisely the type of questions she raises rightly alongside consideration of the bill.

I will not give way. I will make some progress. Given the time I wondered briefly to address CPO powers before I conclude. Because a number of honourable members raised concerns about our changes to the process. Let me be clear these reforms are not about targeting farmers or any specific types of land or landowners. We do want to reform the Compulsory Purchase Process and land, laws. To speed up and lower the costs of housing and delivery infrastructure in the pub interest. We have already taken action, fully implementing direction powers the provide for the removal of home value for the assessment of compensation for certain types of CPO such as those facilitating affordable housing.

Revisions I might say introduced by the previous government in the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Bill. We have published an updated and more detailed guidance on the process to help local other it is. Now this bill will go further in ensuring the process for acquiring land is more efficient, administrative costs are reduced and.... We want to see these powers used and will work closely with local authorities to ensure they have the support you need to take advantage of the reforms.

To conclude I would like to thank once again all of those honourable and right on is Hookwood repeated to the debate today. I look forward to engaging with honourable members across the House as the bill progresses. A wide range of views have been expressed over the course of the debate but this is clearly broad consensus. That when it comes to delivering infrastructure, the shadow says no, the status quo is failing the country. And more importantly failing those who could do better.

The national structure project a demonstrable you to slow project a demonstrable you to slow and uncertain and it is constraining economic growth and undermining of energy security. The current approach to develop the environment too often see sustainable housebuilding and nature recovery stalled. In exercising local democratic oversight which is essential, planning committees clearly do not work as effectively as they could do and local planning authorities do not have adequate funding to deliver their services. The Compulsory Purchase Order process is potently to slow and cumbersome.

They are not equipped to operate in the way we are going to need them to. It is abundantly clear the lack of effective mechanisms across boundaries and strategic planning mean we cannot address developed in tandem the structure needs across some regions as well as we otherwise might. We can and must do things different. That means being prepared to build means as well as the ends. 14 years of failure have left the country with a belief nothing works. But nothing gets built, Britain can no longer do big things.

This government refuses to accept the stagnation and decline we were bequeathed. We were elected on the purpose of change we are determined to deliver it. Through the measures introduced by this landmark bill, we will get Britain building again, unleash economic

**** Possible New Speaker ****

growth and deliver on the promise of national renewal. I commend this bill to the House. Question is the Bill be now read

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question is the Bill be now read a second time As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye". Of the opinion, say, "Aye". Of the contrary, "No". Division, clear the
21:57
None Portrait Division: Planning And Infrastructure Bill, Second Reading
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Colleagues Colleagues are Colleagues are best Colleagues are best to Colleagues are best to be Colleagues are best to be seated for the next bit of business. The question is as on the... Seated question is as on the... Seated please. That means everybody. The please. That means everybody. The question paper -- The question is as question paper -- The question is as on the Order Paper. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye". Of the contrary, "No".

Tell us that ayes, contrary, "No". Tell us that ayes, Tellers the nose. -- Tellers for the Lock the Lock the doors. Order Order order. Order order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right 330. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left 74. The ayes to the right 330. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right 330. The noes to the left 74. So the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Unlock. We now go on to the programme motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to be moved formally. I beg to move. The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. When I go into the money motion to be moved formally. The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. We now go on to the waves and moves motion.

The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. That concludes that bit of business. I now go on to motion number five on constitutional law. The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. We now going to motion number six on electronic communication, ministered to move.

The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. I now go on to motion number seven on Committee on Standards, ministered to move. The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. I now go on to motion number eight on committee of privileges, ministered
22:11
22:11
22:12
22:12
22:14
Jake Richards Portrait Adjournment: Male suicide in Rotherham Jake Richards MP (Rother Valley, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Richards. Thank you. In Rotherham, male suicide is a silent tragedy on the rise. As local MP received any calls or messages early in the morning or late night telling me about another husband, father, brother and friend who has died in these tragic circumstances. Each cause haunts us in our communities. But this is nothing compared to the unimaginable sense of grief and agony suffered by family and friends. The growing phenomenon of male suicide as part of a wider storm we face of worsening mental health and mental health provisions for men and of splintering communities and support networks.

Of a society too often feels some men are unable to open up over each other help or indeed they feel that they are themselves part of the problem. Tonight, I want to make the argument for further government action but also offer a call to arms to us all. We can all do more to check-in on our neighbours, friends and colleagues, to build safe spaces for men to talk, to feel valued, to know that it is OK to not feel OK. And that there is help.

And we should never forget the tragedy of women taking their own lives too and the particular circumstances only women face which might lead to them towards this. This is worthy of its own degrade. Whilst much of what we touch on today will of course be relevant. The numbers regarding men are startling and worth stating bluntly first of suicide is the biggest killer of men under 50. Many cover three out of four suicides in England and Wales, 100 men end their lives each week across the country.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

In Rotherham, men account for 79% of I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving away. In Doncaster last year 80% of all of those who died from suicide women. And of course Doncaster we have one of the largest Doncaster we have one of the largest number of veterans in all of number of veterans in all of Yorkshire and the Humber. The Doncaster Council of the Armed Forces covenant, I wonder if he will join me in promoting the work they do, particularly around the veteran friendly suicide prevention friendly suicide prevention training.

It makes a huge difference to all of those people who take part in it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely. My honourable friend makes a good point. Just on Friday last week a had the Defence Secretary -- I had the Defence Secretary -- I had the Defence Secretary he was with us today and the Defence Minister in Dinnington to speak to these organisations and Mental Health Provision Bill is at Mental Health Provision Bill is at the top of the agenda as it should be. Beyond each individual tragedy there is a wider story. There is a specific challenge for policymakers.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

specific challenge for policymakers. Grappling with male suicide. Yes of course. Can I commend the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I commend the honourable gentleman for Rother Valley and I spoke to him beforehand. For this Adjournment Debate on a subject that everyone of us understands only too everyone of us understands only too well. I am very saddened to hear of the vast number of reasons that are contributing to male suicide and those in his own constituency. More can be done to support men across the UK. As it happens suicide networks, particularly with men, 70% of the suicides in Northern Ireland are men.

The majority of these are recurring in low deprivation areas. Does the honourable member agree with me that the there must be more mental health accessibility in low

**** Possible New Speaker ****

deprivation areas to make sure men are not left behind? Absolutely. I agree that the honourable gentleman who makes a characteristically terrific point. characteristically terrific point. John Lever who doesn't credible work with men in tough times in Kiveton Park in Wales in my constituency is the inspiration for this debate and the campaign I ran in Rotherham. John works with men and women but has extensive experience particular has extensive experience particular issues men face in his area. He has often been the person telling me of another suicide and not infrequently to somebody John knows well or played football with, went to school with a result family friends with.

He has spoken to me about the effects of the decline of post- industrial towns and villages like Kiveton Park, Dinnington, Mali and others in my constituency. These places were built on the back of coal mining. A proud tradition of honest hard work. Offering a sense of purpose and meaning the generations of young men. We should not simply look back at them as spectacles but after the closure of the pits we have too often struggled to replace the social fabric for men. These remain brilliant communities with a long-standing sense of solidarity and, Rodri.

The too many within them still feel lost. Even worse, too many men feel victimised or attacked. I was recently stroked by the words of the musician sound vendor in a newspaper article where he spoke about the times he grew up and where he said lads were being shaved all the time and being made to feel like they were a problem. It is this narrative being told to white boys from nowhere towns. I fear there is some truth in this. Men from towns built in the viable era feel they are a problem in modern times.

I want to play my part as the local MP in changing that. I am not alone. There are brilliant organisations in my constituency already doing fantastic work and Andy's Man Club meet every Monday, Better Today run by John is incredible, supporting men in times of real difficulty. There are many fantastic sports clubs and associations from boxing in Dinnington to others. The regular coffee mornings, the walking and rambling clubs, the monthly men's breakfast will play a vital role in supporting men in difficult

**** Possible New Speaker ****

circumstances. I will give way. I am incredibly grateful to my honourable friend for giving way for honourable friend for giving way for veterans have already been mentioned earlier on in this debate by my honourable friend for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme. I wonder if my honourable friend would join me in paying tribute to veterans in need together? He talks about organisations who support men, this organisations who support men, this is an organisation that supports men everywhere and stay at the fire station -- every Wednesday at the station -- every Wednesday at the fire station and offers hope that is sometimes needed from France.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am very grateful to my honourable friend and it sounds like an absolutely vital service in his constituency just like the many in constituency just like the many in my constituency for and particularly those who focus on veterans which is absolutely critical. Modern teacher, suicide does not simply affect the suicide does not simply affect the person taking their own life. We know the families lose loved ones. Towns and villages are scarred by the dramatic loss of people with great promise and talent.

The number great promise and talent. The number of men who kill themselves each year is eclipsed by those affected by the loss. I would use my role as the MP loss. I would use my role as the MP is the local MP to press the government to take action. So there are certain specific policy issues I want to raise. Firstly I am very aware of specific issues of gambling and male suicide. I have met to local mothers fighting for justice after their over sons -- both of their sons who were hard-working and talented men took their own lives far too young as a result of spiralling online gambling addictions.

Social media and technology have allowed venerable users to have access to gambling. A report two years ago found there were 33% a 43% rise in demand for NHS gambling clinics with one in three having already aimed -- attempted to take their own lives. There are estimated over 400 gabbling related suicides in England each year. These the ones we know. I have previously urged the government to look at ways in which we can empower this and place responsible it is on coroners and their reports to look at issues in a robust and rigorous manner.

Because at the moment the causative link of gabbling addiction and suicide is not given the appropriate recognition. There are broader issues. As the issue of men's mental health is complex, there are specific policy areas the government needs to consult. Firstly the rates of men taking their own lives is the highest in the most deprived communities. The suicide rates in the most deprived 10% of areas in England in the two years from 2017 to 2019 was 14%. Almost double the rate in the least deprived areas.

Indeed rates of men taking their own lives in regions of England are almost double what they are in London. Tackling poverty and insecure work across our country is a Labour mission and it is one that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will save lives. Yes of course. I thank the honourable member for giving way. He is speaking so eloquently about this very difficult and sensitive subject. To touch on the honourable members point about poverty, it is known people living poverty, it is known people living in poverty are three times more likely to take their own life or likely to take their own life or have mental health issues than someone who is on the average wage? I think living into that -- I think I think living into that -- I think linking into that 85% of homeless people are men.

They are often related to mental health issues. I related to mental health issues. I appreciate all of the work you are doing and highlighting poverty.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am very grateful for the intervention. There is a direct link and we should not be shy from talking about that and acknowledging talking about that and acknowledging it and confronting it. We talk about tackling poverty we are talking about saving lives. Secondly we must save our NHS. This government save our NHS. This government inherited a dilapidated health service. Particularly severely under resourced mental health service. 14 resourced mental health service. 14 years of underinvestment, chaotic reform have hindered efforts to grasp this crisis.

Long delays the grasp this crisis. Long delays the treatment and diagnosis mean that so many men cannot get the support they need. They face worsening mental health in the meantime. Third in my health in the meantime. Third in my view we must be bolder in acknowledging the role technology and social media has played in this crisis. New technology and social media can help efforts to combat many difficult times. The internet can allow faster access to mental health provisions and can provide a network but it is clear now for more than a decade the technology and social media can be deeply damaging to mental health.

Eroding confidence, often silo in rather than enhancing our communities and exposing people to potentially harmful material. Many colleagues in the House have been moved by the Netflix drama adolescents. And the light shines on how the internet can remould ideas of masculinity and purpose and completely unbeknownst purpose and completely unbeknownst to those closest to the 13 old boy. Young men are spending less time outside, less time meeting people and communicating in person. All of the things that make us far happier and healthier.

We are often sat alone for hours being bombarded with algorithms showing unrealistic presentations of life or communicating through anonymous group chats. Research shows self- harm content is sometimes being allowed to flourish in social media. By companies failing to remove specific and expert images and encouraging those engaging with such content to befriend one another. The arrival of smartphones has taken place parallel to sharp rises of depression and anxiety in our young people. Of particular concern is the impact of mobile phones have on our young people.

The average 12-year-

**** Possible New Speaker ****

old now spends 29 hours a week on their phone. The equivalent to a part-time job. I will. I commend the honourable member for raising this debate and speaking very powerfully. Would he agree with very powerfully. Would he agree with me we need to look also at some of the employment-related issues? Some of the sectoral issues? And we are tackling male suicide.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tackling male suicide. Absolutely. The honourable has done so much admirable work in this area, long before my time in the area, long before my time in the House will stop so I could only learn from her. One of the issues about male suicide is there are array of issues which continue towards this but should not be quality like it should not be policy concerning silo, it should be every civil department who has concerns about mental health and suicide. Protection is at its heart.

Talking about mobile phones and the effect this has had, since 2010 the average time a teen spend with friends each day has fallen by 65%. I applaud recent government announcements by reviewing these areas of policy but I urge them to grasp the nettle it comes to technology, phones, young people and mental health. In a decades time I believe we will wonder why we did not do so faster. I want to finish with the action I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will take... Yes of course. I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for this debate and I am of course working closely with him on the Mental Health Bill. With the honourable member agree with me one honourable member agree with me one of the issues is families who are worried about their loved ones when worried about their loved ones when they are over the age of 18? There can be barriers in terms of the perceptual Mental Capacity Act which raises the alarm of public authorities.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

authorities. I am very grateful to the honourable member for his intervention. He has a remarkable ability to bring this into any debate and any intervention he makes. He is the most Pacific campaigner -- Severus campaigner on that issue and I will be as well. I want to finish on the action I will take as a local MP. Firstly I pledge to continue to support the brilliant services we already have. I remember attaining my first Andy's Man Club in my area during an election.

I was highly cynical and had seen the marketing but I question how effective this sort of meeting would be. I was blown away. Over the course of a few hours a group of blokes spoke about their weeks and their problems over a cup of T. Some of the chapters mundane. They were finding their work boring. They had had a good weekend with the family. Others were dealing with the most impossible trauma that put all else and particularly my election campaign into stark perspective. Afterwards everyone walked away ready to face the week.

However big the challenges ahead was I have since met Sony men who use the service. One of the first things I did when I was elected was bring Andy's Man Club to Parliament and I promised to continue to champion their work and the work of many others. I also regularly meet with local healthcare practitioners in Rotherham to heal their strategies to bring down the number of men who take the lives locally. They are part of the south integrated care system and it is usually commendable not just on data and evidence to ensure effective and timely interventions and provide tailor targeted support to priority groups and effective treatment support to those affected by men taking their those affected by men taking their own lives.

These plans sit within strategies to tackle health and equalities, loneliness and domestic abuse. I have committed to holding regular meetings at all of the GP practices in my constituency and other support groups to help tackle male suicide. We will hear from the Minister shortly on government national efforts and conversations with my right honourable friend I know with no doubt they grasp the urgency of this crisis and which the government must confront it. Rest assured I will be challenging them at every step of the way to the ambitious -- ambitions of this agenda and nature policies with every town, village and area.

Locally I will be setting up my Rotherham task. All the authorities to account. Working with men and women and we will leave the ongoing awareness campaign and make sure professionals, local and national government take this issue with the seriousness it deserves. I am grateful for the opportunities to speak about this important issue. And hope by doing so we begin more conversations across our borough and together we can bring about meaningful change and bring -- and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

save lives. Amanda Martin has permission to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amanda Martin has permission to
22:29
Amanda Martin Portrait Amanda Martin MP (Portsmouth North, Labour)
-
-
contribute .$$JOIN s

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for bring in for this debate. We have heard male mental health issues deserves our attention. In my own constituency in Portsmouth suicide constituency in Portsmouth suicide is the leading cause among males from 20 to 49 of death. Each year 24 people in Portsmouth take their own people in Portsmouth take their own lives. 70% of them are men. Compared to the national average, Portsmouth has higher rates of divorce, has higher rates of divorce, homelessness and alcohol-related admissions, or relating the factors admissions, or relating the factors to poor mental health.

Despite the statistics we are lacking a dedicated local charity. National dedicated local charity. National charities like Samaritans and Andy's Man Club provide critical support but like local initiatives. However groups like speaking like minds allow men to have spaces to talk and mental health walks. These are not alone enough and we need more funding. My constituency is home to many veterans in dire need. 2020 due to 2025 suicide prevention action for veterans are not even listed as a high-risk group despite the statistics.

As with other proud military history Minister will become. The construction industry is also the backbone of our nation and they have four times higher than the national average. One of the barriers to mail mental health support is the culture of silence. As the mum of three lads or should I say young men, it is heartbreaking to know they have had first-hand experience in their friendship groups of male suicide. Fortunately I can say not all of those attempts were successful. In ending their lives.

But somewhere. This has left a lasting impact on their outlook, on their friendships and has been devastating to those around them. It is time for the government to take bold steps in tackling this crisis, we need targeted funding for mental-health services in combination with strong support for at-risk veterans, construction workers or young men. We must create safe spaces for men to open up and we must ensure no man feels suicide

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is his only option. Because it is Thank you. And I'm very grateful
22:31
Stephen Kinnock Portrait Stephen Kinnock MP, Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) (Aberafan Maesteg, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. And I'm very grateful to my honourable friend the Member for Rother Valley for securing this for Rother Valley for securing this Serious issue of male suicide. I'd also like to congratulate him and what I understand is his first adjournment debate. I'm sure it won't be the last. He's a doughty campaigner for his constituents. I'm also very thankful to all the other members for their valuable contributions and particularly my honourable friend the member Portsmouth North who just made a very powerful speech.

I'd like to also offer my deepest condolences to the friends and families of all of the constituents of all of the honourable members who have contributed to this debate who have contributed to this debate who have been tragically bereaved by suicide. Men tend to seek help for their mental health less than women. As my honourable friend setup men are also more likely to die by suicide with men accounting for three out of four suicides. Rates in Rother Valley sadly reflect this.

Today, we are seeing mental ill-health on the rise and the shocking fact is that suicide is the biggest killer for men under 50. Just as we are determined to end the injustices women face in healthcare, we will not shy away from the need to focus on men's health too. That's why the government will publish a men's health strategy to tackle these problems head-on. In November my right honourable friend the Secretary of State brought together leading campaigners, experts in the Premier league to gather ideas and inform our strategy and our 10 year health plan.

We take suicide prevention extremely seriously because every suicide is a tragedy that has a devastating and enduring impact on families, friends and communities. And with that in mind, I'd like to express my gratitude for the hard work and dedication of local frontline services, including the voluntary sector who play such a vital role in supporting people experiencing suicidal thoughts or contemplating taking their own lives. Organisations like man's club, rather in surround -- Samaritans. The cross sector suicide prevention strategy plan published in 2023 has made some progress and we are working closely with local authorities, health systems and our partners in the voluntary community to see that through first of the strategy identifies middle-aged men as a pro degree for targeted support at a national level and is rightly focused on tackling key drivers which we know can affect men's lives, including issues such as gambling, financial and substance misuse.

Rotherham Council has developed a three-year plan for suicide prevention and self-harm which I understand is currently out for consultation with local partners. I'd like to commend the council and all local partners involved in the development of this involved in the development of this plan. I hope the plan will provide a strong foundation for a new partnership between local and national government because people in my honourable friend's constituency deserved backing at every level. He raises the shocking issue of young men taking their own lives as a result of problem gambling.

The NHS has expanded support for those needing help with overcoming gambling addictions with individuals able to self refer to specialist gambling clinics in England where they can be supported by psychiatrists. Our suicide prevention strategy for England identifies gambling as a common risk factor, list actions to reduce suicide as a result of gambling, and we will explore opportunities to go further to support people with gambling addictions. It can be hard for a young man in today's society. Particular for boys in the most deprived areas of England were expected to live almost 10 years less than those in the wealthiest.

We are committed to improving the nation's mental health services, to ensure individuals can get the support they need when they need it. We are recruiting 8,500 new mental health workers will be trained to support people at risk of suicide. We are also committed to improving the support available to those experiencing a mental health crisis. This year the government is providing £26 million in capital investment to open new mental health crisis centres of reducing pressure on busy A&E services and ensuring people have the support they need when and where they need it.

These new centres will include crisis houses, providing overnight accommodation, sanctuaries and safe havens, providing calm environments for people to visit during the day and mental health specific bases in or adjacent to A&E departments. I'm also grateful to my honourable friend for raising the important issue of technology, which can have a profoundly damaging effect. We should all be concerned about the widespread availability of harmful content online, promoting suicide and self-harm and which can be easily accessed by people who may be vulnerable.

The suicide prevention strategy for England identifies online safety as a priority area for action across government. This is an area where we are working closely with our colleagues at the Department of the Science, Innovation and Technology, including to deliver the commitments in the strategy and look at what else can be done to address online harms, including harmful content shared in pro suicide websites and forums. There is still uncertainty about the relationship between screen time, social media use and child developing. However, I look forward to seeing the results of the research into the impact of smartphones on children due to be published in May this year.

Our current focus is on keeping young people safe while also benefiting from the latest technology. By the summer, robust new protections for children will be enforced through children will be enforced through the Online Safety Act to protect them from harmful content and ensure they have an age-appropriate experience online. Alongside getting these laws in place, we are committed to building the evidence base to inform future action to protect young people online. It is not only the dangers of technology that are our concerns for young people.

They present unique challenges and of course early intervention is vital everyone to stop children and young people from reaching crisis point today or developing mental health issues in the longer term. Schools and colleges play an important role in this early support, which is why we are providing access to a mental health professional every school. We know the mental health support teams like that with me and mind team based in both Doncaster and Rotherham are helping meet the mental health needs of children and young people in education settings.

We are also committed to rolling out open access young futures hubs in communities. The national network is expected to bring local services together and deliver support for young people facing mental health challenges. The Department of education is also reviewing the relationship, sex and health education strategy guidance and the second state education is clear that children's wellbeing should be at the heart of it. DfE will be looking carefully at the consultation responses, considering relevant evidence and talking to partners, including on mental well-being and suicide prevention before setting out next steps and engaging with wide experts.

As part of this process DfE will explore where additional content is required, including suicide and self-harm. Mental health is and remains a priority for the NHS, backed by the mental health investment standard which continues in 25/26 to ensure mental health funding is ring fenced to support delivery of our commitments, including those outlined in the NHS planning guidance. The governor has a statutory requirement to publish an annual statement, setting out expectations NHS mental health spending before the next financial year begins. My right honourable friend this active state will publish this in due course.

I would like to end with a call to action. Suicide is everyone's business. When we improve men's health, the benefits can ripple through families, communities, societies and the economy. When we strive to improvements health, this will not just transform the lives of boys and men. It will also transform the lives of their wives, mothers, sisters, partners, maids, neighbours, children, teachers and doctors. That's why want to strongly encourage all the men to go to the change online NHS portal, to give their views on NHS fit for the future through our 10 year health plan.

Together we will transform men's health in Rotherham, the North Valley and across the country. Thank

**** Possible New Speaker ****

you. The question is of this House do now adjourn. The ayes have it, the now adjourn. The ayes have it, the
22:46
None Portrait Message from His Majesty the King
-

22:46
22:46
None Portrait Message from His Majesty the King
-

22:46
22:46
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page