I am sure the Minister will say that it is extremely difficult to discuss one particular case and one particular borough against the background of planning law, as well as the role of the Mayor, in development issues. I have no intention of commenting on the Westminster situation, except to say that the issues relating to the development of land in London are very special. It is largely to do with the price and lack of availability of land. One aspect of my amendment to Clause 30 related to local development plans.
I am grateful to the Minister for her explanation about the technical nature of the provisions. I shall consider the matter further before bringing anything back, but I am bound to say that the bureaucracy engulfing local development plans is completely counterproductive. I believe I am right in saying that there are still only two local development plans in the country that have been passed and are operating. The rest are still operating on the unitary development plans, because the system is taking so long to wind its way through that it is just not achieving what it set out to achieve. We all saw that coming when we discussed the planning Bill. This simply puts another impediment into the process: the plan has to go to the Mayor and the Secretary of State, the Mayor has to advise the Secretary of State on what he thinks, then it has to come back again to the borough. I do not know how long that will take, but it will probably not be days or weeks—it could be months—and it is another problem in getting these development plans up and running.
I am grateful to the Minister for describing exactly what is going to happen, but it has made me a little more nervous about the process. It is now absolutely engrained in the whole local development plan system that there is far too much bureaucracy and far too many steps. The plans are useless as they stand because they do not advise anyone on anything very much. However, for today’s purposes, I shall not oppose Clause 30.
Clause 30 agreed to.
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c158-9GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:46:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394955
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394955
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394955