Clause 13
Planning Bill
12:00 pm
Clive Betts (Sheffield, Attercliffe, Labour)
One of the more interesting features of our discussions on the definition of nationally significant infrastructure projects is that we have spent an awfully long time being precise about the definitions of certain projects and about what might or might not come within the definition. There has been a lot of detailed debate on trying to understand precisely what the Government intend to include. It is almost as though the whole of that debate is swept away by subsections (3),(4) and (5) of clause 13, which basically state that whatever we have already discussed and put into the Bill can be changed or added to if the Government so decide in the future.
If I have misunderstood the precise intention of those subsections, I am more than happy to be corrected by the Minister. However, it seems that it is almost not worth while being so precise when going through clauses 14 to 26 and the particular definitions of what projects may or may not be included if, at some stage in the future, much more general definitions can simply be added in. In some ways, that can override those that have Ministers acting upon them because it states that the Secretary of State may do so by order.
We know that orders can be subject to parliamentary procedure, but the amount of discussion that those orders have is obviously far less than can be given in Committee stage and there is no ability to amend them, so it is a wide power. I have moved the amendment in the hope that the Minister can convince me, although hon. Members opposite might not be so generous in their approach to matters.