Clause 47
Planning Bill
1:45 pm

Bob Neill (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Bromley and Chislehurst, Conservative)
We need to consider not only the way in which things work in practice, but the need for sensitivity, which the Government should recognise. The right of entry into someone’s home, for example, is a significant interference with their legal rights, such as their rights under the European convention on human rights. The Government are anxious to comply with that convention, which should not be ignored, save on the most compelling grounds. That is why a provision that allows an intrusion into someone’s private property, albeit for justifiable purposes, should not be brought into force without the House being able to vote on it. If it became apparent that there would be a delay in seeing how the 2005 rules work out, we need not wait for that. It is that interference—perhaps I should have stressed that more in my earlier argument—with the rights of the individual that concerns me, but I shall not press the amendment at this stage. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
