Indeed, I completely agree. There should be such a presumption in the Bill and there should be considerable strengthening of the requirement to co-operate between local authorities, because the requirement in the Bill merely means that people have to talk to each other a bit.
If we are really localists in what we are doing, it is essential to get the different levels of planning right. It is not just about a neighbourhood decision or a national decision, but about getting the decision right in terms of what it means. If we come back to this House in a few years' time having not built the houses and not given ourselves sufficient capacity to deal with this new era of waste and resource management, and if we have found that some of the decisions that we have taken at very local level mean that we have moved away from our climate change targets instead of making the necessary concerted effort to move towards them, we will seriously live to regret that gap in the Bill.
At the very least, we should ensure that this Bill is not enacted until a national planning framework is in place and the national planning statements have been discussed and sorted out by this House. The Bill must sit in a proper framework that means that local, regional and national planning work together for the benefit of the people who stand to gain most at local level.
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Alan Whitehead
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 17 January 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
521 c622-3 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:25:40 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_700764
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_700764
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_700764