Planning Bill

During the Committee stage of the Climate Change Bill, my noble friend Lord Taylor of Holbeach moved Amendment No. 17 to insert a new clause headed: "““Statements of compatibility with Climate Change Act””." The Minister of the Crown in charge of a Bill in either House of Parliament must, before its Second Reading, make a statement to the effect that, in his view, the provisions of the Bill are compatible with the principal aim of this Act—a statement of compatibility. I followed my noble friend on that occasion and I should like to read something I said, not because it is that profound but because it helps me in my argument in supporting the amendment. I said: "““Kyoto, Bali, Stern, Al Gore, the World Wildlife Fund, Friends of the Earth and all political parties acknowledge that climate change is the most important issue facing us. If that is the case and we are serious about reducing our emissions, all future legislation should be compatible with this Climate Change Bill. Currently, on the front of all legislation the Minister states that in his view the Bill in question is compatible with the Human Rights Act, and on the front of the Climate Change Bill it states that the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, has made such a statement””." The amendment intended to put on the front of all future Bills that they were compatible with the Climate Change Act. It was supported all around the House—indeed, the noble Baroness, Lady Young, said: "““I think it is a rather fine amendment. I wish that I had thought of it””." The noble Lord, Lord Teverson, not surprisingly, congratulated our Front Bench. Indeed, the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, said that our Front Bench had probably done the House a service in bringing the amendment forward. He went on to say: "““The proposal certainly adds positively to the idea of the Bill being cross-government, up front and transparent and with genuine extra accountability””.—[Official Report, 11 December 2007; col. 210-12.]" The Climate Change Bill is still going through another place, but we could well have had on the front of this legislation a statement from the Minister saying that, in her view, its provisions are compatible with those of the Climate Change Bill. If that had been the case, moving the whole way through the veins of this Bill would have been the requirement that it should be compatible with the climate change legislation. But a statement is not on here, so I warmly support the amendment of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Liverpool. We ought to have something in the Bill to that effect.