I have no quarrel with that; that is a challenge to the process of planning for the long term in relation to CIL. As I said, there is provision for review, but that is the sort of discussion that we are having with the development industry.
I now quickly turn to the amendments. Government Amendment No. 438C is intended to provide further certainty and transparency for developers and the local community about how charging authorities will calculate and set out the level of CIL they propose to charge. It is also a serious response to a number of the concerns expressed by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. To this end, a new subsection (1) would require charging authorities that want to charge CIL to issue a charging schedule, which will set out the rates or criteria that will determine how much CIL will be due from each individual development.
I hope that, along with what I will come to say about the requirement for charging authorities to provide estimates of CIL, liabilities under government Amendment No. 438L will satisfy Amendment No. 436BBA, tabled by the noble Earl, Lord Caithness.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Andrews
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 23 October 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
704 c1285 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:38:20 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_503064
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_503064
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_503064