Clause 79
Planning Bill
3:15 pm

Bob Neill (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Bromley and Chislehurst, Conservative)
Following on from the hon. Gentleman’s point, in other legislation and in common law, definitions of, for example, frivolous and vexatious litigants are well enough known. Is this the same sort of context? It obviously is not entirely the same, but is the frivolous part intended to be the same, and in what context?
Will there be any scope for appeal? One is hoping that there would be, because the people who might make frivolous representations are exactly the sort of people who may end up seeking judiciary review applications and being obstructive. I hope that the Minister can give some clarification of that. I understand that that is what the Bill is trying to achieve.
I note also that in subsection (2)(b) regard is to be had to
“any guidance given by the Secretary of State, and any guidance given by the Commission, relevant to how the application is to be examined.”
Will the guidance from the Secretary of State be guidance to the commission? I assume that that is the case. Will the guidance from the commission be to itself, or will it also be to those appearing before it? Can the Minister give us any idea as to what sort of matters might appear in the guidance? Will there be consultations on the guidance? How will they be published, and what legal status will they have? What is the timetable?
