Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government, with reference to Appendix 2, page 61, Annex 1: Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects reform, of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill: Impact assessment (published May 2025) Appendix 2, page 61, and the November 2027 target date for the updated Airports National Policy Statement, whether they anticipate that the infrastructure planning application for the Heathrow Airport expansion can be submitted before the publication and ratification of the revised Airports National Policy Statement.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

The Government has invited proposals for a third runway at Heathrow to be brought forward by the summer. Once proposals have been received, the Government will review the Airports National Policy Statement in line with the requirements of the Planning Act 2008.

When the ANPS has been reviewed, and depending on the outcome of the review, it will be for scheme promoters to decide when to submit a Development Consent Order application for a third runway scheme.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government what guidance has been provided by either the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government or the Planning Inspectorate on whether a planning inspector is able to give less weight to planning representations if they believe that the representations are a result of, or have been fettered by, foreign interference.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

The weight attaching to a representation is a matter for the decision-maker.

In dealing with the application, officials and Ministers will act in accordance with published propriety guidance on planning casework decisions. Further information is available here.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government, with reference to the Mayor of London press release of 9 May, Mayor: We must build on the green belt to help fix London’s housing crisis, whether the Government’s support for reviewing Green Belt in Greater London includes support for reviewing Metropolitan Open Land in London.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

The designation, management and review of Metropolitan Open Land is a matter for the Mayor of London.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government, with reference to paragraph 19 of the Guidance on planning propriety: planning casework decisions published in December 2021, and MHCLG guidance on Crown Development and Urgent Crown development regarding security sensitive information in planning applications,  whether all representations made by other government departments on a called-in planning application or recovered appeal, including on sensitive security matters, must be disclosed to the applicant.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

Representations on planning applications are dealt with in accordance with paragraphs 18, 19 and 20 of the published propriety guidance on planning casework decisions which can be found here.

Ministers are able to issue a direction under section 321 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 on an application where required. This allows evidence to only be heard by specified persons.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with the government of the United States of America, including the US Embassy in London, relating to the proposed Chinese Embassy development at the Royal Mint in London.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

The Government regularly engages with representatives of foreign governments, including the United States government, to discuss a broad range of issues. The details of these discussions are not made public.

Found: Lord Jamieson (Con) opposed the amendments on the basis that they “risk tipping the balance too far

Found: BARONESS SCOTT OF BYBROOK LORD JAMIESON 135HZH_ After Clause 51, insert the following new Clause—

Found: BARONESS SCOTT OF BYBROOK LORD JAMIESON 94FB_ Clause 48, page 61, line 3, leave out “or require” Member's

Found: Lord Jamieson (Con) opposed the amendments on the basis that they “risk tipping the balance too far

Found: BARONESS SCOTT OF BYBROOK LORD JAMIESON 94FB_ Clause 48, page 61, line 3, leave out “or require” Member's

Found: LORD JAMIESON _ After Clause 51, insert the following new Clause— “Planning decisions: disapplication

Found: Clause 48 BARONESS SCOTT OF BYBROOK LORD JAMIESON 94FB★_ Clause 48, page 61, line 3, leave out “or

Found: Planning and Infrastructure Bill 26 LORD JAMIESON 69_ After Clause 47, insert the following new Clause