My Lords, the House, and probably the public at large, will be greatly enlightened by what the noble Baroness has said. It certainly deserves to be carefully read. I do not think that anything like this has been spelt out before. Consequently, this must have been worth while. The only thing on which I urge her to reflect is that it is much more likely that these sorts of things can be properly thrashed out at a specific issue hearing than at an open-floor meeting, because the subject matter is of a nature that would make it not an open-floor meeting but a cleared-floor one almost immediately. These are very technical and difficult subjects which bore most people to death. Therefore, it is much better to deal with them under Clause 90 than at an open-floor hearing. I shall read what she said. If, as I believe—she nodded—this is the first time this matter has been spelt out, it will be of much more general interest than just to me and those who have taken part in this debate. I thank her very much for giving us the advantage of her explanation. For the moment, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 93 [Hearings: general provisions]:
[Amendments Nos. 90 and 91 not moved.]
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Colville of Culross
(Crossbench)
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 c502-3 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:08:10 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508116
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508116
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508116