Localism Bill

Baroness Hanham Excerpts

Monday 17th October 2011 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

211: Schedule 12, page 349, line 44, at end insert—
“21A(1) Section 333 (regulations and orders) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (3) (regulations to be subject to annulment) after “except regulations under section 88” insert “or paragraph 15(5) or 16 of Schedule 4B”.
(3) After that subsection insert—
“(3A) No regulations may be made under paragraph 15(5) or 16 of Schedule 4B unless a draft of the instrument containing the regulations has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.””

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

211B: Clause 111, page 90, line 20, at end insert—
“(2) For the purposes of the operation of this section in relation to any particular application for planning permission, a “pre-existing enforcement notice” is an enforcement notice issued before the application was received by the local planning authority.”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

213A: Clause 115, page 95, line 41, after “(5)” insert “and the right of appeal under section 225AA”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

214A: Clause 115, page 97, line 28, at end insert—
“225AA Appeal against notice under section 225A
(1) A person on whom a removal notice has been served in accordance with section 225A(3) or (5)(b) may appeal to a magistrates’ court on any of the following grounds—
(a) that the display structure concerned is not used for the display of advertisements in contravention of regulations under section 220;(b) that there has been some informality, defect or error in, or in connection with, the notice;(c) that the period between the date of the notice and the time specified in the notice is not reasonably sufficient for the removal of the display structure;(d) that the notice should have been served on another person.(2) For the purposes of subsection (3), a person is a “permitted appellant” in relation to a removal notice if—
(a) the removal notice has been fixed or exhibited in accordance with section 225A(5)(a);(b) the person is an owner or occupier of the land on which the display structure concerned is situated; and(c) no copy of the removal notice has been served on the person in accordance with section 225A(5)(b).(3) A person who is a permitted appellant in relation to a removal notice may appeal to a magistrates’ court on any of the following grounds—
(a) that the display structure concerned is not used for the display of advertisements in contravention of regulations under section 220;(b) that there has been some informality, defect or error in, or in connection with, the notice;(c) that the period between the date of the notice and the time specified in the notice is not reasonably sufficient for the removal of the display structure. (4) So far as an appeal under this section is based on the ground mentioned in subsection (1)(b) or (3)(b), the court must dismiss the appeal if it is satisfied that the informality, defect or error was not a material one.
(5) If an appeal under subsection (1) is based on the ground mentioned in subsection (1)(d), the appellant must serve a copy of the notice of appeal on each person who the appellant considers is a person on whom the removal notice should have been served in accordance with section 225A(3) or (5)(b).
(6) If—
(a) a removal notice is served on a person in accordance with section 225A(3) or (5)(b), and(b) the local planning authority bring proceedings against the person for the recovery under section 225A(7) of any expenses,it is not open to the person to raise in the proceedings any question which the person could have raised in an appeal under subsection (1).(7) In this section “removal notice” and “display structure” have the same meaning as in section 225A.”

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Lucas]

I hope we see annual reports. This is such an exciting, interesting and unexplored area that we are going into that we really need to know what is going on rather earlier than three years. However, I would measure things in a much happier vein than the list of grizzles in proposed subsection (2) in this amendment. It is going to make a great change and advance to people’s lives—and I would like to see that documented—as much as create possible pitfalls.

[Baroness Hanham]

My Lords, at this time of night I am going to resist the temptation thrown at me by the Labour Lord opposite to discuss further the sustainable development in the NPPF—great sighs of relief opposite. I will therefore confine myself to the proposal that there should be a report on progress.

We agree that there should be a transparent system for monitoring and reporting. As with decentralising decision-making over housing and planning matters to councils and local communities, we expect them to report progress on all aspects of planning and to make this available to local communities to whom they are accountable. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 already places a duty on councils to undertake a survey of matters affecting the development of their area, including—I promise I will not go back to sustainable development again—its physical, economic, social and environmental characteristics.

The council is already required to produce an annual monitoring report of local planning activity. Our proposals in the Bill and local planning regulations, on which we have recently consulted, will streamline the process for preparing these reports, reducing the burden on councils and strengthening public accountability. Local planning regulations will also require councils to report progress in relation to neighbourhood development plans and demonstrate how they have worked with others under the duty to co-operate.

My department will support councils in this process by continuing to produce official statistics that can contribute to the evidence base used by councils to develop their plans. With these reassurances, I hope the noble Lord will withdraw the amendment.

[Lord McKenzie of Luton]

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for that response but it did not deal with the central point. I accept that there are a range of reporting requirements for local authorities over a range of aspects, but the purpose of this amendment was to say that we have a new system here. A great deal of uncertainty surrounds it. It is right that both Houses of Parliament should be able to take stock of how it has worked out overall. If I understood him, the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, was in favour of more frequent reporting than three years. Three years does not seem an unreasonable timeframe. It would be a pity if we could not take the whole of Part 5 and have some report back on how it has all worked out as a package at a macro level. This is not the time of night to pursue this in greater depth, but I ask the Government to reconsider this issue. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

236B: Clause 221, page 201, line 4, leave out “57”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

241A: Clause 221, page 201, line 34, after “7(3),” insert—
“(ba) an order or regulations under Schedule 24,”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

241B: Clause 221, page 201, line 41, at end insert—
“(aa) an order under section (Designation of Welsh public authorities),”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

242ZBA: Clause 222, page 202, line 17, after “14,” insert “22 to 27,”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

242A: Schedule 25, page 421, line 6, at end insert—
“Part 2AOther authorities

Reference	Extent of repeal
Transport Act 1968 (c. 73)	In section 10(1)(xxviii), the words “so far as not required for the purposes of their business”.
Local Government Act 2003 (c. 26)	In section 93(7)(b), the “and” at the end.”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

244: Schedule 25, page 424, line 10, column 2, at beginning insert—

	“Section 33(4), (6) and (7).
	Section 34(5) and (6).
	Section 38(4), (6) and (7).
	Section 40(4), (6) and (7).”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

248A: Clause 224, page 202, line 36, leave out “the Secretary of State” and insert “a Minister of the Crown”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

249AA: Clause 225, page 202, line 41, at end insert—
“(za) Part 2,”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

249BA: Clause 225, page 203, line 10, at end insert “, subject to subsection (6).
(6) Any amendment or repeal made by this Act in the Transport Act 1968, and the repeal of section 121(1) of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980, extend to England and Wales only.”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

249C: Clause 226, page 203, line 15, at end insert—
“( ) section (Arrangements for provision of services and discharge of functions),”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Hanham]

251: In the Title, line 2, leave out “Local Commission for” and insert “Commission for Local”