Onshore Wind (Planning Policy)
Debate between Mark Prisk and Tessa MuntUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Prisk
We will write to all local planning authorities and to Sir Michael Pitt at the Planning Inspectorate. I take my hon. Friend’s point and I know that the issue is foremost in the mind of the Secretary of State. May I add my strong congratulations to my hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Chris Heaton-Harris)? We have listened and we have improved the guidance for the better.
Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)
The Minister mentioned specifically that meeting our energy goals should not mean overriding natural environment considerations. Will he confirm that he will include in his amendment to the legislation the higher planning authorities that will make judgments about equally ugly pylons and the need to underground electricity transmission lines across the beautiful Somerset levels?
Mr Prisk
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for that question. Today, clearly, we are considering the question of onshore wind turbines, so I think it would be wiser if I did not draw myself into the even more vexed question of pylons. I know that the Secretary of State and I will consider her question should it have any due implications.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Mark Prisk and Tessa Munt(11 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Mr Prisk
We are taking a proactive role to ensure that rough sleeping in particular does not happen. That is what “No second night out” is all about. In London, where it has been trialled, 70% of people spend just one night on the streets. We need to tackle those numbers, but it is wrong to simply say that everything is gloomy; there is good action, there are positive ideas from councils and we have to work together.
Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)
If the Secretary of State decides to designate a local planning authority, under proposed new section 62A to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, planning applications can be made directly to him. What mechanisms will be in place to ensure that the influence of local people through consultation is not reduced if the voice of local authorities is excluded from the process?
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Mark Prisk and Tessa Munt(12 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Prisk
In fact, the Labour party tried to do that at the very beginning—in 1998, I believe—and failed. What we are doing is using our procurement powers to make sure that government sets the standard. I think that that is the best way, but I am always happy to look at unreasonable behaviour by large corporations and I would be happy to look at any further details that the hon. Gentleman can provide.
Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)
The county of Avon was abolished in April 1996. The Somerset village of Shipham was never part of Avon and has always been in Somerset, so it is a constant irritation to my constituents that post, including that from all Government agencies and any organisation using the Royal Mail’s database, is addressed to Shipham in Avon. When complaints are made to the Royal Mail’s headquarters, they elicit the reply, “We like to give users an historical perspective.” That is complete tosh. The Royal Mail does not update its database and will not correct inaccuracies in the address details. Will the Minister wade into this ancient, decades-old dispute on behalf of the long-suffering villagers and get this bizarre—