Clause 70
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [Lords]
5:00 pm
David Curry (Skipton and Ripon, Conservative)
I am slightly puzzled by subsection (2). Either something is sustainable or it is not. I am curious about why we have that little special reference to “good design”. Which lobby is responsible? Is this Lord Rogers striking again? I agree with the comments that the right hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich made on Chelsea barracks, which I thought were absolutely spot on. It is curious that the clause stresses the importance of good design. How about stressing the importance of fuel efficiency, of trying to have combined heat and power or of not having to travel by private vehicle? Why has that one little point about design suddenly popped up? I would have thought that either we had sustainability or we did not.