draft Tees Valley Combined Authority (Functions) order 2017

Debate between Andrew Percy and Gavin Shuker
Tuesday 21st February 2017

(7 years, 9 months ago)

General Committees
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Andrew Percy Portrait Andrew Percy
- Hansard - -

I thank the shadow Secretary of State for what was a generally positive response to the journey of devolution if not, necessarily, to its structure. She is right about the shadow Minister. He and I have gone to head to head on every single one of these orders thus far. In every instance, we have debated the issue of a mayoralty, whether it was within or outwith the particular order before us, and have debated at length the future of devolution across the rest of England and the different structures and options available to local authorities who might wish to reform themselves.

We have also debated turnout, at length. In today’s Opposition it is not always clear that there is consistency but we certainly had consistency today from the shadow Secretary of State, which is something we do not see very often from the Opposition Benches. On that, she can go back and report positively—

Andrew Percy Portrait Andrew Percy
- Hansard - -

This is a positive statement about the quality of the Opposition in the shadow CLG team, in that they seem to be on the same side.

The shadow Secretary of State made particular mention of a candidate, so I should even it up by saying that we have an excellent candidate in Ben Houchen. I hope, and feel, that this could be the year for us in the Tees Valley.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Percy and Gavin Shuker
Monday 16th January 2017

(7 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Gavin Shuker Portrait Mr Gavin Shuker (Luton South) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

13. What assessment he has made of the effect of permitted development rights on pub closures.

Andrew Percy Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Andrew Percy)
- Hansard - -

Pubs are at the heart of community life. That is why we have made provision for assets of community value to be placed on the register by communities that value their pub. That takes away the permitted development rights automatically.

Gavin Shuker Portrait Mr Shuker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The co-operative pub model is saving valuable locals right across the country, but the asset of community value designation process that the Minister mentions, which enables this in the first place, can often be far too clunky and lengthy. Would not a better approach be to remove permitted development rights and protect all pubs by default?

Andrew Percy Portrait Andrew Percy
- Hansard - -

There are now already in excess of 1,750 pubs listed as assets of community value. The moment a nomination goes in, the permitted development rights are removed. Moreover, local authorities are free, if they wish, to apply for an article 4 direction to remove those rights across a whole area.

Water Industry

Debate between Andrew Percy and Gavin Shuker
Tuesday 5th November 2013

(11 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Gavin Shuker Portrait Gavin Shuker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. If we look at the price review periods since privatisation, we will see that water bills came down in real terms during only one of them and that was under the previous Labour Government. On the price review process, my hunch is that this Government believe that the water companies will read the signals coming from hard-pressed consumers and come in at RPI plus 0 or RPI minus 1 in the next price review period and claim it as their victory, but let us be clear: getting a sustained reduction in water costs requires action from this Government.

Andrew Percy Portrait Andrew Percy
- Hansard - -

We have moved on a little, but the hon. Gentleman has graciously given way. He is doing a good job of reading the Labour brief and trying to pretend that all of a sudden it is interested in people’s bills. On the Pitt review, is he suggesting that it was somehow planned by the Labour Government, or did it come about because I and my constituents were all under about 2 feet of water for a long time?

Gavin Shuker Portrait Gavin Shuker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Intense flooding has major implications and climate change means that it will happen more regularly, but the hon. Gentleman seems to be saying that the previous Labour Government were in some way wrong to review the situation and flood defences. He was not the MP for his area at the time, but he knows that the flooding was devastating. If he wants proper action on ensuring that his constituents will be protected against the next bout of flooding, he should support our efforts to amend the Water Bill to make sure that there is a proper, workable Flood Re solution for flooding insurance. He mentions the Labour brief. I humbly point out to him that for the past few years I have been writing the brief.