Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Sir Norman Fowler: The hon. Gentleman has a few minutes before the end of the debate. Will he answer at least one question that I tried to ask in an intervention? He suggested that the lack of a legal challenge from my constituents and me invalidated our argument. Surely he understands that we were advised that getting a judicial review would probably cost about £40,000 or £50,000. It is not unreasonable for residents to decide that they cannot raise such a sum. That does not reflect on their strength of feeling.

4 Feb 1998 : Column 1206

The Minister had the inspector's report from May, when the Government came to office. Why did he wait until a week after the House went into recess before announcing his decision?

Mr. Caborn: I understand why no legal challenge was mounted during the six-week period. However, the right hon. Gentleman never challenged RPG11--the foundation of the policy--when it was being debated in the normal channels of putting together the strategic overview for the region. It was made clear that there were no brown-field sites in the area. The two sites chosen were clearly identified then. It is incumbent on the right hon. Gentleman to explain why he did not object at the time.

The right hon. Gentleman also asked about the inspector's report. I hope that I have some integrity in the House. We could not just make the decision on 7 May. When we came to government after 18 years in opposition, we had to find our feet.

I apologise if the right hon. Gentleman believes that our timing was planned to manipulate the situation. It was not. We had a lot of planning decisions to make. The processes of government had slowed down during the run-up to the election. We worked very hard from early May, when we came into office, through the summer. I apologise if the right hon. Gentleman was offended, but we had no ulterior motive. I shall defend any of my ministerial decisions at the Dispatch Box.

Question put and agreed to.



 IndexHome Page