New Clause 35 - Enforcement
Planning and Compulsory Purchase (Re-committed) Bill
3:30 pm

Photo of Mr Keith Hill

Mr Keith Hill (Minister of State (Housing and Planning), Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Streatham, Labour)

I, too, express my delight, Mr. Pike, that you are presiding over our proceedings this afternoon.

Currently, local planning authorities have the primary responsibility for taking whatever action may be necessary in the interests of proper planning in their areas. That includes discretion over whether a discontinuance order is issued. Section 102 of the 1990 Act enables a local planning authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or continued subject to conditions, or that any buildings or works shall be altered or removed. That provides planning authorities with the flexibility to tailor their approach to each case to fit the nature and circumstances of the case.

Making the power obligatory, which new clause 35 would do—it was ably moved by the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir Sydney Chapman)—would remove that flexibility. It may also bring into play other elements of section 102, such as the compensation arrangements. A duty to implement in all cases, irrespective of the nature and circumstances, would place an additional and unwarranted burden on local authorities.

It is important that local authorities are able to target their resources—we have heard a great deal about resources today—on those cases that are causing most harm. In other words, my answer is about whether we should leave it to the discretion of local authorities to act in the expedient fashion that the hon. Gentleman described or whether we make it obligatory. The argument is about local discretion. I therefore urge him to withdraw the new clause.

Annotations

No annotations

Sign in or join to post a public annotation.