Planning Bill

My Lords, I will take the Clause 49 representations first. I take the point. I am not surprised at the response, but I thought that I would give it a try. On the other representations, as I said in introducing the amendments, ““must have regard to”” does not mean accepting. The IPC and the Secretary of State will have to consider all representations before excluding any. The difference between us is where consideration becomes decision. That is where I am having some difficulty, because I see consideration of the representations as a bigger part of the decision-making process than the Minister has presented it. On Amendment No. 107, as the Minister said, ““usually”” there will be no NPS, but one has to bear in mind the unusual. All things are conceivable in politics. There may have been a change of administration without a change of government. The Secretary of State may be reflecting on the process of reviewing the outcomes, in which case the whole review process of the NPS should be gone through. I am not sure where that leaves an application that is with the Secretary of State. I thought that it was probably an obvious answer that was staring me in the face and I am grateful to the Minister for spelling it out. I have made my points and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 104 not moved.] [Amendment No. 104A had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.] [Amendment No. 105 not moved.] [Amendment No. 105A had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.] [Amendment No. 106 not moved.] Clause 103 [Decisions of Secretary of State]: [Amendments Nos. 107 to 110 not moved.] Clause 106 [Suspension during review of national policy statement]: