UK Parliament / Open data

Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

We have to accept that there are occasions when we just disagree. We disagree about what the words in the Bill mean in terms of the kinds of bodies that will be created and how they will work. I do not believe that what the Minister said about them will happen in practice. I do not in any way accuse her of bad faith. There is no harm in disagreeing. We argue about matters and discuss them in these Committees at great length in the hope that by the end we all see the error of each other’s ways or the error of our own ways and we will come to an agreement or a compromise. That is a useful process, but sometimes we disagree. The Minister said that it was a false dichotomy to consider, on one hand, economic growth, sustainability or development and, on the other, environmental and social sustainability. These general concepts come down to making lots and lots of practical decisions. I do not know whether it is a dichotomy, false or otherwise, but decisions have to be made and often there is a choice. Is the choice to make a decision on jobs or economic growth, knowing the effect that it will have on the environment? Is it in the interests of an area to have a more super-duper transport system, bigger or faster roads, or even railways, even though there will be some environmental damage? You try to look at the issue as a whole and try to put a proposal together as a package, but you still have choices to make. The purpose of the bodies to be set up under the Bill has an effect on the decisions that are made. It does not sweep away everything in one direction or the other, but it moves the centre of gravity and moves the position further along the spectrum in one way or another. There is no point pretending that this is not the case. Everything in this Bill and recent Bills, such as the then Planning Bill, has been to push economic issues more strongly than environmental and social issues. That is what has happened, and I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Graham, agrees with me.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

708 c271GC 

Session

2008-09

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top