Clause 46
Planning Bill
1:30 pm
Bob Neill (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Bromley and Chislehurst, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 262, in clause 46, page 21, line 41, at end insert—
‘(2A) The applicant shall pay the recipient’s reasonable costs of complying with the notice.’.
The amendment deals with a fairly simple point. We do not have a problem with the basic concept of a notice being served in the way proposed in the clause, because it is appropriate to obtain such information. However, the applicants will often be large organisations that are very well resourced, and they may well be serving notice to very small organisations or individuals. In fairness, it is not unreasonable for the recipient of the notice to claim back reasonable costs from the applicant in such circumstances. We are rightly trying to front-load much more of the work into the process for the reasons that we have discussed, but it is a question of equality and fairness.
The provision has the potential to be onerous for a private occupier or small farmer whose land is affected, if they have to comply fully with a notice, particularly if there are complications over ownership. In financial terms, there will be no skin off the nose of the applicant for a project of that magnitude when set against the overall scheme of things, but the amendment would do something to redress the balance in favour of the little people. In particular, it would add to the sense of fairness that I am sure the Minister wants to achieve in the commission’s working. I hope that it would not do any damage to the scheme of the Bill.