That is a dreadful response, with due respect to the Minister. Can she tell me how much money has been spent under the preparations Act? Why, if the Government are not going to proceed with it, do they need it on the statute book?
This is the Government at their most duplicitous. They would prefer a planning-gain supplement. I can see that in a few years’ time they will turn around and say that CIL is not working, so we need a planning-gain supplement. As we would still have the preparations Act on the statute book, they could use that to get on and start planning, introducing another bit of legislation. That is unacceptable. I hope that the Minister has a better answer for me now. Given her assurance that they are not going to introduce PGS, why does one still need the preparations Act on the statute book?
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl of Caithness
(Conservative)
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 c1343 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:33:34 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_503150
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_503150
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_503150