I thank those who supported these amendments. I was interested to hear the Minister say that he would take away the measure and reconsider part of it. To our mind costs are involved. This is not a simple matter. Ownership of land is extremely complicated. Advice will have to be sought to get the right answer about who all the interested parties might be. They may be people who have rights of way or easements. Charities, property companies and trusts may be involved. It is not that simple. We still believe that 14 days is a very short period. I know that the Bill says, "““not … earlier than the end of the 14 days””,"
and that therefore the period could be longer than that. However, it is always tempting for the commission to say, ““How much notice do we have to give under the Bill? It says 14 days. OK, it will be 14 days””. That is the problem. There needs to be a bit of common sense and logic about when the notices are put forward. I look forward to reading the Minister’s remarks in his letter.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Cathcart
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 16 October 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
704 c894 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:55:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_500890
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_500890
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_500890