Clause
170
Secretary
of
State
Amendments
made: No. 566, in clause 170, page 96, line 32, after
‘authority’, insert ‘or other public
authority’.
No.
567, in
clause 170, page 96, line 33, leave
out ‘a charging’ and insert
‘the’.—[John
Healey.]
Question
proposed, That the clause, as amended, stand part of the
Bill.
Mrs.
Lait:
I want to make the general point that the clause is
controlling and centralising, and we are unhappy with the powers it
gives to the Secretary of State to direct charging authorities. It also
provides the potential for the Secretary of State to reduce
Government funding, although we keep being told that that will not
happen. In the interest of brevity, we will probably return to the
matter on Report, but I wanted to put it on record that the clause
gives too many powers to the Secretary of State to direct
authorities.
John
Healey:
The hon. Lady is right that the
provision provides powers of intervention to the Secretary of State
that could be used to control the imposition, collection or application
of the levy. We would envisage using those powers only in exceptional
circumstances and as a last resort, if the spending proposed by a
charging authority did not meet the purpose of the levy: to provide
infrastructure to support an area’s
development.
The
clause also provides for regulations, which would also be a reserve
power that we would use only in exceptional circumstances and as a last
resort. It is, nevertheless, important to cap the amount that an
authority could levy. We would not anticipate that authorities would
set the level of the levy to the extent that it would choke off
significant development, but the risk of
circumstances in which that could happen remains. Therefore, the powers
are important safeguards for both developers and local communities. I
understand the hon. Lady’s reservations. None the less, I hope
that hon. Members will accept that the powers are important and that
the clause should remain part of the
Bill.
Question put
and agreed to.
Clause
170, as
amended,
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
171
CIL
regulations:
general
Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mrs.
Lait:
I do not think that I will get terribly far with my
objections to the clause. I have already asked whether the draft
regulations will be available for the Lords to consider, as we have not
had them, and received a fairly dusty
answer.
I
think that we are signing a blank cheque in the legislation. I am
concerned that the House will have no input into the draft regulations,
as we all know that it is, in effect, extraordinarily difficult to
amend the regulations when they come before the House through the
affirmative
or negative procedure. Therefore, I would wish the Lords to have draft
regulations, so that they can have a positive debate on much of the
detail that we have been unable to obtain from the Minister; although
he has been slightly more co-operative than in previous sections of the
Bill, and we are beginning to get a bit of a feel for the details. When
the regulations do come forward to the House for approval, I hope that
the Minister will put them forward under the affirmative
procedure.
John
Healey:
I have two points to make. First, we will
absolutely ensure that when the Bill goes to the other place, the Lords
are fully informed about the development of thinking behind it, and
that they have the maximum information possible, depending on the stage
of the discussions and conclusions and any formal consultation
required.
Secondly, as
I indicated previously, we intend the major regulation-making
provisions in this part of the Bill to be subject to the affirmative
procedure. Whether through the negative or affirmative procedure, the
House will get the chance to re-examine the provisions that may be
proposed under secondary
legislation.
Question
put and agreed to.
Clause
171
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Further consideration
adjourned.—[Mr.
Watts.]
Adjourned
accordingly at five minutes to Four o’clock till Tuesday 5
February at half-past Ten
o’clock.
| 
