My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that detailed explanation. She gives me quite a lot of comfort, but I still worry. At an early stage when people are trying to develop a project and they know they have to do a full EIA that will be subject to the most detailed examination, not only by the people granting permission but by the opposition, they should be able to get on to adjacent land and do their measurements. I recall, when I was working on the Channel Tunnel and the terminal at Folkestone a long time ago, that there was the prospect of a major landslide in that area. There were landslides all the way along that coast, not on land that the company was trying to buy but on land above it. If it had not been able to get on to the land above it, take the necessary measurements and leave the equipment in there, it could have been severely criticised at a later date.
I will read with great interest what my noble friend has said and see whether I am satisfied that it gives as good a basis for going forward with an application as the Transport and Works Act might do. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 81B to 81D not moved.]
Clause 54 [Acceptance of applications]:
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Berkeley
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
705 c490-1 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:07:59 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508100
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508100
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508100