House of Commons

Session 2002 - 03 Publications on the internet Standing Committee Debates Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill

Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill

Column Number: 83 Standing Committee G Tuesday 14 January 2003 (Morning) [Mr. Peter Pike in the Chair] Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill 8.55 am Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold): On a point of order, Mr. Pike. One of the joys of getting up at this unearthly hour, is that some of us have been up for many hours already to prepare to debate amendments. However, yet again we have a problem in that housekeeping functions are not keeping up to the speed of the Committee. I know that we work at lightning speed, but as yet we do not have Hansard for our previous sittings. I do not see how the Committee can function properly until we have seen a record of what happened in those sittings. I seek your guidance as to whether the Committee can be postponed until such time as we can obtain copies of Hansard. I do not see how we can perform our function otherwise. The Chairman: That is not a matter for the Chair, but I will ensure that those comments are passed on. I am told that Hansard should be available some time today. Mr. Clifton-Brown: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. With great respect, I do not think that that is good enough. I simply do not know how we are expected to function if we do not have a record of what happened in the previous sittings. I ask again whether the Committee can be postponed until we can obtain copies of Hansard. The Chairman: I have no power to do that. I understand the hon. Gentleman's point and I will ensure that it is drawn to the attention of the appropriate people. I have no power to take the motion that he is moving. Mr. Clifton-Brown: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. I seek your guidance and clarification. As of yesterday, we did not have a consolidated document on all the amendments. The somewhat arcane numbering system for our amendments makes it difficult enough to follow them in any case, but when they appear on three different pieces of paper—for Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of last week—matters are even worse. How many times a week does that consolidated document come out? I understand that it used to appear every day, but that no longer appears to be the case. The Chairman: That point is incorrect. The consolidated list is published on each day on which the Committee sits, which means it is published twice a week. On other days, additional lists are printed that show the additional motions and amendments tabled since the previous meeting. Mr. Clifton-Brown: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. I do not want to be abstruse, and I know that the Committee wants to get on. I am not trying to waste time, but I want to get the mechanics right. We had a separate list on Thursday and Friday. I cannot Column Number: 84 understand why Friday's list did not consolidate Thursday's amendments as well. The Chairman: The point is that the lists are published on the basis that they are not consolidated until they have to be prepared for the Committee sitting. That procedure has always applied. Whatever Committee you sit on, you will pick up several lists until the day of the sitting. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Tony McNulty): I beg to move That— (1) during proceedings on the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill the Standing Committee do meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays at five minutes to Nine o'clock and at half-past Two o'clock; (2) 12 sittings in all shall be allotted to the consideration of the Bill by the Committee; (3) the proceedings to be taken on the sittings shall be as shown in the second column of the Table below and shall be taken in the order so shown; (4) the proceedings which under paragraph (3) are to be taken on any sitting shall (and so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the time specified in the third column of the Table; (5) paragraph (3) does not prevent proceedings being taken (in the order shown in the second column of the Table) at any earlier sitting than that provided for under paragraph (3) if previous proceedings have already been concluded. TABLE Sitting Proceedings Time for conclusion of proceedings 1st Part 1, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 1, Clauses 12 and 13 — 2nd Part 1, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 1, Clauses 12 and 13 — 3rd Part 1, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 1, Clauses 12 and 13 (so far as not previously concluded) 11.25 am 4th Clauses 14 to 36 — 5th Clauses 14 to 36 — 6th Clauses 14 to 36 (so far as not previously concluded), New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 2 5 pm 7th Clauses 37 to 39, Schedule 1, Clauses 40 to 49, Schedule 2, Clauses 50 to 53 — 8th Clauses 37 to 39, Schedule 1, Clauses 40 to 49, Schedule 2, Clauses 50 to 53 — 9th Clauses 37 to 39, Schedule 1, Clauses 40 to 49, Schedule 2, Part 5 (so far as not previously concluded), New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 5 11.25 am 10th Part 6, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 6 5 pm 11th Part 7, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 7, Clauses 78 to 83, Schedules 3 and 4, Clause 84, Schedule 5, Clause 85, Schedule 6, Clauses 86 to 90 — 12th Part 7, New Clauses and New Schedules relating to Part 7, Clauses 78 to 83, Schedules 3 and 4, Clause 84, Schedule 5, Clause 85, Schedule 6, Clauses 86 to 90 (so far as not previously concluded), remaining New Clauses and New Schedules and any remaining proceedings on the Bill 5 pm The programming motion was greeted with unusual acclamation and unanimity in the programming sub- Column Number: 85 committee. I should put my hand up and say mea culpa for the need for it, because I had a significant input to the original programming motion. The notion that clauses 12 and 13 and the start of part 2 should be incorporated with prior deliberations was an oversight that we have duly corrected. I commend the motion to the Committee. Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne): It would be churlish of us not to thank the usual channels for facilitating this opportunity to do things in a different way, and I thank the Minister for saying that he might have had a hand in what happened. While on my feet, I cannot miss the opportunity to say that the advice that we have always given and the objections that we have always raised to the inclusion of knives in the debate of a Bill have been proved to be correct. Had we been working our way sensibly through this one, the Minister's correction would not have been necessary, and my intervention need not have taken place. Question put and agreed to. Clause 2 Regional planning bodies Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill. Mr. Clifton-Brown rose— The Chairman: You have to rise quickly if you wish to speak in my Committees, Mr. Clifton-Brown. Mr. Clifton-Brown: I can see that you work very quickly, Mr. Pike. Even at this time of the morning, you are extremely sharp. Clause 2 is one of the Bill's most important as it sets up the duties and functions of a regional planning body. We made progress last week, in that we learned from the Minister that the recognised bodies are, in the absence of elected regional assemblies, to be the regional chambers. Of the eight regions, three are not yet up and running, but they will be by the spring, in the words of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty). I hope that I have quoted him correctly; if not, he will no doubt put the record straight. That was one of the most important revelations of our two sittings last week, and it was very welcome. It would be useful to have the Hansard before me, so that I could check the accuracy of my quotation, but I must rely on my memory instead. I am slightly concerned about the explanatory notes, which make it clear that, in itself, a change of membership of the recognised regional planning body would not render it invalid. What does the Minister understand by that? To take the most extreme example, if the regional planning body were to contract out all its functions, would that in itself render it derecognised? That point needs to be clarified. Having said that, I must say that the Committee has examined the clause in huge detail and made progress. Column Number: 86 We have much to do today, so in order that we may continue to make progress, I shall let the Minister reply. Mr. McNulty: The hon. Gentleman is right to say that clause 2 is fundamental to the development of the Bill. Under subsection (2), permission is given to develop subsequent regulations and criteria for membership of the regional planning body, as we discussed last week. The criteria currently envisaged for the membership or establishment of RPBs, against which they will be judged and duly recognised, consist, as outlined in the Green Paper, of whether the RPB and the steering groups that are proposed to manage preparation of the revised strategy are sufficiently representative; whether the RPB will consult a sufficiently broad range of regional stakeholders, including through focus groups or planning forums; whether the RPB will work sufficiently closely with all groups to ensure delivery of the strategy; and whether the RPB will be able to take a sufficiently strategic regional view, addressing difficult regional choices where necessary. Under clause 2(6), if the membership of the body changes—for example, if someone leaves for whatever reason and someone else joins—there is no need to re-recognise or, indeed, derecognise the body. As I understand it, a simple change of membership is permitted in the spirit of what the RPB should consist of and in the context of the criteria in the Green Paper. Mr. Clifton-Brown: Clause 2(6) states: ''A change in the membership of a body which is not incorporated does not—'' these are the important words— ''(by itself) affect the validity of the recognition of the body.'' In what circumstances does the Minister envisage that a body will be so transformed by a change in membership that he would have to consider derecognising it?

©Parliamentary copyright 2003	Prepared 14 January 2003