Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Pickles and Natascha Engel

Monday 7th April 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Pickles]

Article 4 has been remarkably successful in both protecting local pubs and regulating unwanted additional shops on the high street. I remind my hon. Friend that in the Budget the Chancellor announced that we will review use class and issue a consultation in the not-too-distant future. I hope that my hon. Friend will contribute to that consultation.

[Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)]

5. If he will take steps to ensure that the views of local people are given priority in planning decisions on large-scale housing projects.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Pickles and Natascha Engel

Monday 8th July 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Pickles]

I am shocked to hear that information. People will now wonder whether councillors are working for their residents or their trade union bosses, and I shall review the situation as a matter of urgency.

[Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)]

May I give the Minister another chance to answer the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck) and give him another example? Fifty-one per cent. of council tenants in my constituency are in rent arrears because they cannot afford to pay the bedroom tax. There are no smaller properties for them to move into, so what are they supposed to do?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Pickles and Natascha Engel

Monday 4th February 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Pickles]

There is a very good case for comparing that bin tax with what the neighbouring Amber Valley borough council is doing. That Conservative authority is about to introduce a new recycling service, which will be more convenient for households and will reduce the amount of waste that goes into landfill, and includes a free garden waste collection service. That is good practice and I encourage other councils to follow suit.

[Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)]

7. Whether his Department plans to review change-of-use planning regulations.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Pickles]

My hon. Friend makes a reasonable point, although the situation has moved on since he got that figure. It is now £16 billion, which represents the largest ever council reserves, not including schools, so it is difficult to say that local authorities are hard-pressed. We need them to use their balances sensibly while taking measures to get costs out of their base.

[Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)]

T9. Two elderly constituents who live in a retirement complex recently received a bill for £200 from their managing agent completely out of the blue. Managing agents of leasehold housing are completely unregulated, so those elderly constituents have nowhere to turn either to appeal or to demand a review. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that managing agents of leasehold housing are brought under the regulation of the Financial Services Authority?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Pickles and Natascha Engel

Monday 17th September 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Pickles]

My hon. Friend must have come across some grumpy planning inspectors. By and large, they are there to introduce the national planning policy framework, and to ensure that decisions are made in accordance with it. Local democratically elected representatives have a duty to look to the well-being of their constituents not only now, but in future. There must always be a balance, but the green belt remains very safe.

[Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State guarantee that he will not alter the definition or designation of green belt?

[Mr Pickles]

Of course.

Housing and Planning

Debate between Lord Pickles and Natascha Engel

Thursday 6th September 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Pickles]

Of course the process will remain balanced. We introduced the presumption in favour of sustainable development so that the balance between the environment, business and heritage could be finely drawn. As somebody who sees planning inspectors’ reports reasonably regularly—a joy that my hon. Friends the new Ministers will now have—I know that they are clearly taking very seriously the mechanism of looking at those three pillars of sustainable development.

[Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)]

How does the Secretary of State propose to prevent developers from using this as another opportunity to build on greenfield land—not green belt, but greenfield—instead of being forced to build on the banks of brownfield land for which they already have planning permission?

[Mr Pickles]

The hon. Lady needs to understand that section 106 is about agreed development—it is not about inviting developers to look at other sites but about existing permissions. The Local Government Association helpfully points out that there are about 400,000 permissions for dwellings. That strengthens our case, because a lot of those developments are locked by section 106. We will go about them on a case-by-case basis, and developers will have to demonstrate that the development is uneconomic in order for the section 106 provision to be renegotiated. We have played a big part in the process with local authorities that have started it, and it works out extremely well in the sense that social housing then starts to be delivered. This package will deliver housing in a more realistic way.