30 Apr 2004 : Column 1111
House of Commons
Friday 30 April 2004
The House met at half-past Nine o'clock
PRAYERS
The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means took the Chair as Deputy Speaker, pursuant to the Standing Order.
[Sir Michael Lord in the Chair]
Orders of the Day
Sustainable and Secure Buildings Bill
As amended in the Standing Committee, considered.
New Clause 1
'After section 1 of the Building Act 1984 (c. 55) insert—
"1A Buildings of special historical or architectural interest
(1) In making building regulations the Secretary of State shall have regard, in particular, to the desirability of preserving the character of protected buildings that are of special historical or architectural interest.
(2) In this section 'protected buildings' means—
(a) listed buildings within the meaning of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (see section 1(5) of that Act); and
(b) buildings situated in areas designated as conservation areas under section 69 of that Act.".'.—[Mr. Stunell.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
9.34 am
Mr. Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove): I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
The Bill spent two days in Committee. There was a broad consensus on its aims. Perhaps the consensus on its contents was not quite so complete, and one or two of my proposals that went into Committee bit the dust on the way through. The liveliest debate was on the subject of how my Bill might affect historic buildings. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) moved an amendment in Committee that secured support from all sides, but after debate she helpfully withdrew it, which allowed further consideration of how we might proceed to deal with the concerns that were raised.
New clause 1 is the outcome of that further consideration. It follows a round of meetings with the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North and English Heritage, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and other organisations interested in heritage matters. Earlier this week I attended a meeting with representatives of English Heritage, who tell me that they strongly support the new clause and the Bill as a
30 Apr 2004 : Column 1112
whole, with its general intentions of improving the security of the building stock, its crime resistance and its environmental sustainability.
The clause requires the Secretary of State to have regard to the need to preserve the character of protected buildings when making regulations. Of course, he already does. In part L of the building regulations there are already specific solutions to some of the issues presented by the need to preserve the character of buildings while still allowing them to be fit for purpose, safe to use and, in the context of the Bill, sustainable. In any case, before any regulations came into force, there would be a round of consultations, and organisations and bodies with concerns about heritage buildings would be in a good position to make their concerns known. The clause gives a statutory basis for organisations such as English Heritage and others with a legitimate concern to have their views heard.
The clause requires the Minister to have regard to protected buildings, which it defines as those that are listed, in what one might call the anorak's jargon, and those that are in conservation areas. I have been told that there are about 370,000 listed buildings in England and Wales, although that includes some rather odd animals such as telephone kiosks and grottos in ornamental parks. However, as we discussed on Second Reading, there is considerable difficulty in this country in knowing what a building is and how many we have. That was also the subject of discussion in Committee.
The figure of 370,000 is at the top end. In reality, there are probably about 350,000 listed buildings, as might be commonly understood in the Chamber. Of those, about 9,000 are listed as grade I—that is, of the very highest quality both inside and outside. About 20,000 are listed as grade II*, which means they are of good quality outside, with some interesting features inside. More than 300,000 others are listed as grade II, which is what the man in the street would recognise as a listed building—one which, looked at from the outside, has a bit of character and history. That is one category that would be included in the clause.
Secondly, the clause covers buildings in conservation areas. There are about 9,000 conservation areas in this country, though interestingly enough, there is no requirement for local authorities to notify anybody when they designate conservation areas. That is probably a good thing, but it makes it hard to be sure how many there are and what is inside them.
Many of the listed buildings in the first category are, of course, in conservation areas, and the overlap between the two categories is large.
By definition, listed buildings and buildings in conservation areas form a unique part of our country's environment, and in many cases they are cultural cornerstones—one has only to examine parts of London to see their impact on our national identity and sense of Britishness, or maybe Englishness.
Historic buildings also produce economic benefits because they generate tourism and travel. There were 63 million visits to historic visitor attractions last year, plus many more visits to picturesque villages and ancient town centres, so buildings have a significant employment and economic value.
My Bill properly takes account of the special needs and concerns of those who manage historic buildings. I want to make it clear that the new clause will not exempt
30 Apr 2004 : Column 1113
such buildings from building regulations, but it will ensure that when the building regulations emerge, they must take account of special needs and characteristics. That might be in the form of approved documents, of which there are already examples, containing standard solutions that can be taken off the shelf and adapted so that they work unobtrusively, even on sensitive historic buildings. Alternatively, regulations might be drawn up to permit flexibility, perhaps taking a whole building approach to compliance rather than requiring specific elements of the building to comply. The objective that the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) sought in Committee can clearly be achieved and in a straightforward and simple way, and the new clause provides the foundations for that.
Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe) (Lab): I apologise for missing the hon. Gentleman's opening remarks. Will regulations produced under the new clause exempt specific buildings, or will the procedure be more flexible than that? Will buildings such as telephone kiosks be ignored because they cannot be brought into line?
Mr. Stunell: The hon. Gentleman's question is on the second or third tier of decision taking. I appreciate that he was not privy to our discussions on Second Reading and in Committee. My Bill enables regulations to be made in the future, but it does not prescribe them. The new clause does not prescribe regulations, but it states that the Secretary of State shall have regard to the particular needs of historic buildings when he considers regulations. The example raised by the hon. Gentleman is precisely the kind of issue that must be weighed up when a specific regulation is considered.
Approved documents are one of the two routes on regulations. They are on-the-shelf solutions that somebody can take down and use, and they might need to include one or two models that are suitable for historic buildings. The other route is to say, "You do not have to comply with any specific set of proposals as long as at the end of it you have got a building that does not leak heat, that stands up and from which people can escape in the case of fire." I hope that I have reassured the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Dr. Palmer), but if not, I am sure that he will come back to me.
The new clause is a useful safeguard, although I have seen little evidence that it will be needed, because all the signs are that that point is taken into account when regulations are drawn up, regardless of the Government or the individual Minister. I have responded to the points made in Committee, and I hope that the new clause will reassure not only hon. Members, but organisations such as English Heritage, which were keen to see it. Bearing in mind the all-party support in Committee, I hope that the new clause is an uncontroversial addition to my Bill, which is now in a form approved by parliamentary counsel, and I hope that the House will agree it rapidly today.
9.45 pm
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |