All 2 Debates between Baroness Stowell of Beeston and Baroness Andrews

Infrastructure Bill [HL]

Debate between Baroness Stowell of Beeston and Baroness Andrews
Thursday 10th July 2014

(9 years, 10 months ago)

Grand Committee
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Andrews Portrait Baroness Andrews
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am very grateful for that useful information, and it is good news about the consultation process, but in relation to the question I asked about the number of planners who have been lost, the Minister put a great deal of emphasis on the Killian Pretty review, which was published five years ago. When she comes back to me with those statistics, will she break them down so that we can see the rate of attrition among planners, before and after Killian Pretty, and have some sort of time series? In relation to the questions raised by the noble Lord, Lord Tope, about the evidence, did the Killian Pretty review say why it thought these delays were occurring? There is an absence of hard evidence of what is going wrong in the system. What is the problem we are trying to solve? That is what the Committee is keen to get to the bottom of. Did the Killian Pretty review recommend this as a solution, or is it a solution that has been generated by the department?

Baroness Stowell of Beeston Portrait Baroness Stowell of Beeston
- Hansard - -

I shall see what further information I am able to provide to the noble Baroness following today’s debate. I do not know how much I can provide.

Baroness Andrews Portrait Baroness Andrews
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am very happy for the Minister to write to me.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston Portrait Baroness Stowell of Beeston
- Hansard - -

I will certainly see what is available. Fundamentally—not to pre-empt the further research I shall do—I think the evidence we have gathered is that a huge amount of effort goes into the process of deciding whether something should receive planning permission, but the conditions post that planning permission are not attracting the priority and importance that we need them to have once it has been decided that something should be built. It is as basic as that. We have already talked about the way we all share a common interest in seeing supply coming through more quickly. This is an area where we think there is scope for improvement. With proper safeguards in place, the measures that we are putting forward will go a long way to address a problem that clearly exists.

Housing: Accessibility

Debate between Baroness Stowell of Beeston and Baroness Andrews
Wednesday 25th June 2014

(9 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Stowell of Beeston Portrait Baroness Stowell of Beeston
- Hansard - -

We need a range of different types of housing to meet a range of needs. One of the things that the Government are doing is providing special funding for accessible homes that are aimed precisely at older people and adults with disabilities. We are expecting 3,500 of those homes to be delivered before 2018.

Baroness Andrews Portrait Baroness Andrews (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, is the Minister aware that one disabled person is six lives in unsuitable accommodation? Is she further aware that, while it costs £28,000 to treat a hip fracture, it costs about £1,800 to put in a stair lift? Does she agree that it makes absolute economic sense to invest as much as possible in accessible housing? She has spoken about new regulations. Can she assure me that they will require all developers to build new houses to the lifetime homes standards?

Baroness Stowell of Beeston Portrait Baroness Stowell of Beeston
- Hansard - -

We certainly want to make sure that more and more homes are available and that more and more of them are at a standard to meet the needs of a range of people. The noble Baroness makes an important point: investment in this area saves money in the longer term. Having those national standards will ensure that developers are much more inclined to comply with this requirement in future.