My hon. Friend points out yet again the inadequacies of the Bill and the lack of forethought that has gone into it.
The community infrastructure levy is another of those inadequacies. There is general agreement that it is a sensible way to reform section 106 and it is based on the tariff system as developed in Milton Keynes. The proposal was, I am told, worked out by the private sector and local government and the Government have promised to consult on it. We were interested to learn that there was an idea that while we were in Committee the clauses on its implementation should be introduced. Today, we learn that we will get regulations. I am not at all surprised given that the consultation on the implementation of the levy has either, by coincidence, gone out only today or has not yet gone out.
I am not entirely clear about how the Committee is meant to discuss such a fundamental change to the planning laws. We will work hard to ensure that we get much more detail on how the system will work. The levy replaces the planning gain supplement, which will not be repealed. Could it be that the Prime Minister still prefers the planning gain supplement?
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Jacqui Lait
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 10 December 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
469 c115-6 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:37:59 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_428307
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_428307
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_428307