Planning Bill

My Lords, I spoke strongly in favour of the sense of this amendment in Committee. I have been rereading the debate, including the powerful speech in opposition to this by the noble Lord, Lord Woolmer of Leeds. I understood the body language of noble Lords opposite to mean that they were encouraging him to speak again. The answer to the noble Lord, Lord Howarth, is simple. Of course, the will of the elected House must prevail, and that has frequently happened. It happens in cases where a statutory instrument requires affirmative votes in both Houses. If one House turns it down, it fails, but it is, of course, brought back, at which point the House, if it is the upper House, yields to the lower House. We have the advantage of the admirable report by the noble Lord, Lord Cunningham of Felling, who spelt out, in the context of the reform of Parliament, that the supremacy of the elected House is not in question. It would not be in question here. What we are talking about is—