Clause 1 - Interpretation of principal terms
London Olympics Bill
9:30 am
Richard Caborn (Minister of State (Sport), Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Sheffield Central, Labour)
Many would have sympathy with the points made by the hon. Member for Bath, but we have covered them in the Bill and in Olympic delivery authority's responsibilities.
Amendment No. 30 would include a definition of sustainable development in clause 1 of the Bill, which sets out its principal terms. Clause 4 requires the ODA to contribute to sustainable development when carrying out its functions, which is vital to ensure that we leave the lasting legacy after 2012. There has been a lengthy debate on that. However, I do not accept that we need a definition of sustainable development in clause 1 for two reasons.
The first is because the UK strategy on sustainable development ''Securing the Future'' provides the main source of guidance on the meaning of sustainable development. Secondly, similar legislation that imposes sustainable development duties on public bodies, such as the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998, does not provide a definition of sustainable development. Therefore, I do not propose to have one in this Bill and I ask for the amendment to be withdrawn.
Amendment No. 14 would include a specific reference to sustainable development in clause 5. We do not think that that is necessary. Clause 4 already puts the ODA under a general duty to contribute to sustainable development in exercising all its functions. Clause 5(5)(e) requires it to have a regard, in discharging planning functions, to local authorities' development plans, which must also contribute to sustainable development. It will not be able to ignore sustainable development considerations in discharging its planning functions.
Moreover, the balance to be struck between economic, social, resource and the environmental aspect in any particular case will vary. I think that was a point to which the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent (Hugh Robertson) referred. There might be occasions when an optimum balance cannot be struck but it is nevertheless appropriate to grant permission.
Clause 5 puts the ODA in exactly the same position as local authorities. Statutory requirements in relation to sustainable development in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 apply to the plan-making function and not to development control decision making. The ODA will have only the development control function. As far as this Government are concerned, sustainable development is not a bolt-on; it is substantial part of the policy making. It applies to RDAs and to the ODA as well. Given that reassurance, I hope the hon. Gentleman will withdraw the amendment.