Clause 2 - Regional planning bodies
Planning and Compulsory Purchase (Re-committed) Bill
3:30 pm
Mr Matthew Green (Ludlow, Liberal Democrat)
I believe that I have already spoken to amendment No. 171, so I will move on to the amendment tabled in my name and in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton .
Amendment No. 117 would leave out subsection (3), which states:
''The Secretary of State may give a direction withdrawing recognition of''
a regional planning body. It is not so much that I want to take that power away, as that I want the Minister to explain under what circumstances the Secretary of State might withdraw recognition of a regional planning body and what the consequences would be if the Secretary of State assumed the functions of that body. That is probably how it would work. That provision is particularly draconian, and I assume that the Minister will say that he hopes that it will never have to be used, and that he would not go anywhere near it.
We need to know—I am sure that local planning bodies would like to know—under what sort of circumstances the Secretary of State would withdraw recognition, and how the system would then function. If regional spatial strategies were operating across the country and one regional planning body were to have its recognition withdrawn, there would be a great hole in the planning structure, which would have to be filled by the Secretary of State. I am sure that the Secretary of State could cope with the minutiae that I am sure will exist in every RSS in the country, but he may struggle to find the time to do so. What arrangements will there be to deal with such circumstances? Amendment No. 117 is a probing amendment. It is for the Minister to explain how, why and what would happen in those circumstances.
I take this opportunity to add my strong support to the principle of amendment No. 272, although I suspect that it is not the way to solve the problem because the drafting would have slightly odd consequences.
The Bill will take some powers away from county councils, but not all of them: they will be left with waste and minerals. Those powers are currently administered by elected county councillors, but will pass to RPBs. By next autumn, we may have some referendums, which will hopefully result in yes votes in the three northern regions. It is conceivable that six months to a year later, we will have functioning elected regional assemblies in those regions. Short of an earthquake, the Government are not going to win referendums in the south-east, the south-west or, I suspect, most of the midlands, given their regional boundaries. Therefore, it is unlikely that there will be elected regional assemblies, certainly in the south-east, in the foreseeable future. I regret that, as I would like us to have regional assemblies. The boundaries are wrong and should be changed.
We will have a period of five or 10 years, in which powers will have been taken from elected councillors and given to an unelected body, an RPB. We will have a quasi-elected regional body—not even that; it will have people on it who have been elected to other bodies—councillors roughly in proportion to the political strength in the region—but that is not really the same. The regional planning bodies will not be accountable in such circumstances. They are accountable to the Secretary of State. Essentially, until there are elected regional assemblies, this represents a centralising of power.—Ultimately, power rests with the Secretary of State. That is of deep concern to anybody who is a democrat or a proponent of the devolution of power, as I am sure that the Minister is.
However, for a considerable period, probably at least five years, there will be no devolution of power. Amendment No. 272 seeks—probably in an imperfect way—to ensure that the powers are not taken from the county councils and that the regional planning body is not set up until there is a regional elected assembly. Until then, we would continue to have the current structure. There is planning at a regional level—the Government office does some—but the power still rests with the county councils. I realise that that will cause the Government problems, because there will be different speeds in different parts of the country. However, that is a consequence of devolution, something that both my party and the Minister's agree is a way forward.