Sustainable Communities Bill

My Lords, I, too, thank the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford, and Mr Nick Hurd for his work in another place. It is quite an achievement to get a Private Member’s Bill through both Houses. I managed to do it with the Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Bill and I know the nightmares that are faced by all parties, including the Government, at every stage. That occurred at a time when certain Members of the other place were still alive and making life even more difficult than is the case now. I am particularly keen on a Bill that has ““sustainability”” in its Title. When I held my party’s brief for overseas development under the ODA, as it then was, I discovered that the Government would try to strike out any amendment which used the word ““sustainable”” because it had connotations of unaffordability. You never knew exactly how much it would cost, as sustainability lasts for ever. This Bill is supported on all sides of the House. Therefore, unless somebody appears from nowhere, the only people who can kill it are the Government. I very much hope that they will not table amendments to the Bill. Amendments were made in the Commons. I very much hope that they will support the Bill in its present form. I think that without amendments the Bill—which, as everybody has acknowledged, is a great idea—will go through. However, the real reason I support the Bill is its underlying bottom-up basis. It comes from local power for local people, based around the three criteria of social, economic and environmental issues. I live in two places: a small village in Northumberland and Tufnell Park in north London. I found it interesting that I originally thought of Northumberland, where we have the problem of the local shop closing down and elderly people having to move out of the village, because if you have no car you are stuck. Local transport has disappeared, and with the post office and the local shop closing down went the local newspapers. It is a very difficult situation. However, I was particularly taken when I listened to one of the advocates of the Bill, Mr Ron Bailey, on Radio 4, who was talking about this in terms of town and city landscapes. Cities have exactly the same problem, as a city is just a vast number of local communities together. Those local communities can often be destroyed by large supermarkets in the area, which suck out all the local shops even in the high street. You end up with areas which a few years ago were very vibrant now being dead zones with faceless shops or with none of the local character and none of the local community that was once associated with them. This will be a difficult Bill to implement, but I hope that the Local Government Association, acting as the selectors—although that has not been set out in the Bill—will publicise the fact that local decision-making means that people do not have to accept decisions from on high. The planning process always gives the impression that it is something that people cannot stop and because the rules allow it, it has to take place. That should not be the case. Local communities know what they want and what they do not want, and if they do not want a certain supermarket or another development in their area, it should be up to that local community. It enhances a local community to have a local campaign on an issue. Everyone will know that the one way to meet your neighbours in London is set up an organisation such as a neighbourhood watch, which allows you to meet people who live in your street. On that basis, I very much support the Bill, and I hope that the Government will support it wholeheartedly.