(1-4)

House of Commons

Session 2003 - 04
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament

LORDS REASONS for insisting on certain amendments to which
the commons have disagreed AND a lords AMENDMENT in lieu of
a certain other lords amendment to the
PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE BILL
[The page and line references are to HL Bill 10 as first printed for the Lords.]
Before Clause 1
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 1
1
Insert the following new Clause—

“Application of Part 1

Part 1 shall apply only if an elected assembly for the region has been

established.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

The Commons disagree to this Amendment for the following Reason—
1A
Because it is not appropriate to restrict the application of a regional spatial strategy only to

regions which have elected assemblies.

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON
The Lords insist on their Amendment 1 to which the Commons have disagreed, for the

following Reason—
1B
Because responsibility for drawing up regional spatial strategies should lie with the elected

representatives of the communities affected.
Clause 1
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 3
3
Page 1, line 11, at end insert—

Bill 94 53/3

(  2  )

“(3A)
The RSS must include sub-regional plans for all parts of the region in

accordance with geographical boundaries defined by the RPB.

(3B)
The sub-regional plans referred to in subsection (3A) shall be prepared by

the authorities falling within section 4(1) if their area or any part of their

area is in the defined sub-region.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

The Commons disagree to this Amendment for the following Reason—
3A
Because it is not appropriate to create more than one tier of regional spatial strategy.

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON
The Lords insist on their Amendment 3 to which the Commons have disagreed, for the

following Reason—
3B
Because regional spatial strategies should be based on the views of local communities.
Clause 44
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 41
41
Page 31, line 14, at end insert—

“( )
Any planning application that the Secretary of State declares is of national

or regional importance, as designated through subsection (1), must be

subject to an economic impact report.

( )
Any planning application for a major infrastructure project based on a site-

specific proposal in a national policy statement White Paper shall be

considered by an inspector who shall be able to question the need for a

specific development.”

COMMONS INSISTENCE AND REASON

The Commons disagree to this Amendment for the following Reason—
41A
Because it is not appropriate to make such provisions.

LORDS AMENDMENT IN LIEU

The Lords do not insist on their Amendment 41 to which the Commons have disagreed, but

do propose the following amendment in lieu thereof—
41B
Page 31, line 26, at end insert—

“(4A)
If the Secretary of State gives a direction under subsection (2) the applicant

must prepare an economic impact report which must—

(a)
be in such form and contain such matter as is prescribed by

development order;

(b)
be submitted to the Secretary of State in accordance with such

provision as is so prescribed.

(  3  )

(4B)
For the purposes of subsection (4A) the Secretary of State may, by

development order, prescribe such requirements as to publicity and notice

as he thinks appropriate.”

(  4  )