asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many councils in England are subject to a moratorium or severe restrictions on granting planning permission for new housing.

My Lords, no councils are subject to centrally imposed moratoria—by that, I mean centrally imposed blanket bans—or severe restrictions. Her Majesty's Government are not aware of any areas where there is a locally set moratorium. Some councils have introduced local policies that seek to restrict development within their areas in particular circumstances.

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, which is the same reply we have had to several of these Questions over the last year or two. Such replies meet with astonishment from local authority officers, councillors and, indeed, developers and local people in these local authorities and district councils, of which there is a string across the north of England—for example, Chesterfield. I spoke this afternoon to my Honourable Friend Paul Holmes, the MP for Chesterfield. There are moratoriums and local restrictions on giving any more planning permission in these areas—not on greenfield sites but on brownfield sites which can contribute to regeneration. Will the Government find out the facts about these places and hold discussions? If they do not want these moratoriums and want these councils to contribute to the 3 million houses that the Government want, will they let them do so? I should declare an interest as a member of such a council.

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for raising this Question and giving me the opportunity to put on record something which I think will be helpful and may ameliorate some of the local authority astonishment that he described. I believe that there has been a misunderstanding on the part of some local authorities regarding what we are saying about the targets that are set in regional spatial strategies.

The Government have made it clear that we do not expect RSS targets to be ceilings. Taking this alongside planning policy statement 3 on housing, which was published last year, local authorities such as Pendle are now free to adopt a much more flexible approach to housing provision. For example, regional housing strategies are being reviewed, and we hope to publish the one for the north-west next year. If local authorities are not happy with their allocation of 190, for example, in Pendle, they can build more. They can make those decisions taking into account the need for sustainability and with regard to the need for pathfinder regeneration in the region as a whole.

My Lords, is the Minister aware that a much greater threat to many parts of the countryside is what are known as Travellers? Do the Government have the same degree of authority in getting some sort of Ordnung on the way in which those people behave? The local people dare not.

My Lords, I am aware that some people have concerns about the experience of living close to Traveller communities. That is a long-standing concern, and the Government will be looking at that through the Housing and Regeneration Bill, which has already been debated in the other place. We will have a chance later in the Session to have a serious debate about these issues.

My Lords, is not the Government's top-down approach the problem, not the solution? Of course we want rules to protect our green belt, and I wish I were confident that the Government did too. Should not local councils and local people decide where new housing goes? Why is unwanted development still being imposed by government inspectors in gardens in our lovely suburbs while brown land owned by the Government lies derelict?

My Lords, I do not accept that interpretation of the planning system in this country. We have worked very hard to develop new approaches to planning that are plan-led. They are based on a bottom-up approach as well as national policy frameworks. We need local planning frameworks to be based on evidence from local communities to set aside, in a planned way, five years of available land. Yes, 60 per cent of that land for development needs to come from brownfield sites, but local authorities can ensure that as a local policy they exclude gardens from the brownfield allocation. I do not accept that we are looking at a top-down planning approach. The Government have ambitious targets to tackle the lack of affordable housing in this country and to ensure that we see 3 million new homes by 2020.

My Lords, with the greatest respect, thanking the noble Baroness for her Answer, is she aware that answering—which is not her fault—these excessively long questions totally destroys the essence of what is supposed to be Question Time?

My Lords, I appreciate that it is to the advantage of the House to have as many questions answered as possible, but where there are serious misunderstandings about government policy, as we have seen with regard to regional spatial strategies, speaking on behalf of the Government I should have a chance to put important points on the record.

My Lords, I think that the Government have overturned policy in one fell swoop in this announcement; perhaps not. Will the Minister make sure that her Government Office officials in the English regions and her planning inspectors are aware of what she has just announced? They are overturning local authority planning decisions on precisely the grounds that I have been talking about.

My Lords, I assure the noble Lord that all appropriate offices and officers are properly informed of the Government's approach to RSS targets. He is highlighting the fact that government policy is moving on in a very important way. We need to make the planning system free up land so that we can see new houses for all those who are suffering because of a lack of affordability and a lack of access to decent homes in a place where they want to live.