Planning Process: Probity

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Excerpts
Tuesday 16th June 2020

(4 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Greenhalgh Portrait Lord Greenhalgh
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

To be absolutely clear, those discussions over the development simply did not occur. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State was seated next to Mr Desmond. That was not of his choosing. The matter was raised by Mr Desmond and the Secretary of State refused to comment on the planning application. The position that we are now in is that to ensure that there is no inference of bias, as I said in a previous answer, this matter will be determined, as agreed, with the Mayor of London and the planning authority for Tower Hamlets.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, with respect, the Minister has not answered any of the questions put by my noble friends and others. Unless he does so now, will the House and the public not be justified in considering that the £12,000 that Richard Desmond gave to the Tory party at that Carlton Club dinner will be seen as cash for influence?

Lord Greenhalgh Portrait Lord Greenhalgh
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With respect, I have been absolutely clear that fundraising by political parties is currently highly regulated and all the fundraising issues associated with this have entirely been followed. The Secretary of State was not aware that he was going to be sitting next to Mr Desmond, but made that fact and the fact that he refused to engage in a discussion on that specific planning application known to the department. Therefore, I can guarantee that the Secretary of State behaved with absolute probity and takes his duties as Secretary of State responsible for these planning matters seriously.