That is absolutely why we should have a national debate on what the country needs, which will take place around the national policy statement. It is why the public and Parliament should be involved and why Select Committees now have wide-ranging scrutiny powers over the national policy statement. It is why we have a debate in this House and in the other place and why a Minister has to have regard to all of that consultation and discussion before coming back with a designated national policy statement. That is a key crunch point for the Bill.
I absolutely believe that politicians need to be able to argue their case to say what they think is in the best long-term interests of this country and to have that subjected to scrutiny and challenge in a democratic system. I fundamentally believe that identifying those interests up front in the national policy statement, set against the framework of the independent commission, provides a far more transparent degree of accountability than leaving Ministers to wait until the very end of the process, when they then have to seek to intervene. That is far less effective and less transparent than what is proposed.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Hazel Blears
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
478 c344-5 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:10:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_486608
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_486608
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_486608