New Clause
26
Enforcement
charters
‘(1) PCPA 2004 is
amended as follows.
(2) After
section 18 (statements of community involvement)
insert—
“18A
Enforcement charters
(1) The
local planning authority must prepare an enforcement
charter.
(2) For the purposes
of this Act, an ‘enforcement charter’ shall set
out—
(a) a statement of
the authority’s policies as regards their taking enforcement
action for the purposes of TCPA
1990,
(b) an account of how
members of the public are to bring any ostensible breach of planning
control to the attention of the authority,
and
(c) an
account—
(i) of how any
complaint to the authority as regards the taking by them of enforcement
action is to be made, and
(ii)
of their procedures for dealing with any such
complaint.
(3) The Secretary of
State shall issue guidance to a planning authority for the purposes of
this section and an authority must have regard to any guidance so
issued.
(4) The local planning
authority shall have a duty to review its charter and publish
it—
(a) whenever
required to do so by the Secretary of
State,
(b) at least every two
years, and
(c) in such a manner
as the Secretary of State shall by regulation
prescribe.
(5) For the purposes
of sections 20 and 24 the enforcement charter is not a local
development document.”’.—[Dan
Rogerson.]
Brought
up, and read the First
time.
Dan
Rogerson:
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second
time.
I feel that I
might be making myself unpopular with hon. Members who have pressing
business elsewhere. However, there is an important aspect that we have
not addressed thoroughly enough, and it is the second issue
about which constituents often come to us: enforcement. We go through a
lengthy process of planning applications and negotiation to confirm
what a developer must do to stay within the boundaries of what the
local authority wants to impose. Again, we find that some of those
aspects are not complied with. It is brave of a local authority to
proceed with enforcement, because all too often enforcement does not
take place. I will not
delay the Committee a great deal, but this measure would provide an
opportunity to hold local authorities to account for the conditions
that they impose. If enforcement is genuine, it gives more value to the
planning process. If we are to have any faith in the system, we must
take account not only of what happens in the run-up to the approval of
a planning application, but also of what happens afterwards in ensuring
that those who make the development do so within the boundaries that
have been set.
Mr.
Dhanda:
Local planning authorities are already advised to
have an enforcement policy statement. The details are set out in
chapter 1 of the Department’s publication, “Enforcing
Planning Control: Good Practice Guide for Local Planning
Authorities”. The enforcement policy statement includes almost
all the requirements of the proposed enforcement charter in new clause
26. The policy statement sets out the authority’s policy for
taking enforcement action. It gives details of the procedures for
dealing with any complaints about enforcement action and it will be
reviewed and published every year.
The Secretary
of State gives guidance to local planning authorities in the good
practice guide and in enforcement circular 10/97. That is being
revised, and we expect to consult on a new draft circular later in the
year—I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will look out for it and
may want to have some input. What is not covered in the enforcement
policy statement, but would be in the enforcement charter, is an
obligation on members of the public to inform the authority about a
breach of planning control or to make a complaint about enforcement
action, in a specified manner. That is the weakness of the new clause.
We consider it less bureaucratic to allow members of the public to
bring any breaches of planning control to the attention of their local
planning authority by whatever means they happen to choose. We also
consider that they should be able to complain to the local planning
authority in their own way. Therefore, the new clause is unnecessary.
Enforcement policy statements are the best means of publishing local
planning authorities’ enforcement procedures and
practices.
5.45
pm
Dan
Rogerson:
A continuing theme among constituents who come
to me with enforcement problems is that they feel that they are doing
the council’s job for them, in checking whether something is
being built within legal bounds. Local authority resources are part of
the problem. Constituents think that local authorities should have
greater resources to check whether laws are being followed, rather than
relying on people who are not technical experts. When those people
examine a development, they may spot that a window, for example, was
not quite where it was meant to be, or that a wall was slightly higher
or went out further than originally stated.
However, I am
pleased to hear that the Government continue to look at that matter and
are introducing further guidelines to encourage local authorities to
take it seriously. The problem is that often local authorities do take
it seriously, but risk a cost in taking an enforcement action against
someone, which is, therefore, a disincentive for them to do so. Some
matters certainly bear further consideration and I am glad to hear that
the Government are doing that. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the
motion.
Motion
and clause, by leave, withdrawn.
New Schedule
1
‘Appeals:
miscellaneous amendments
Town and Country
Planning Act 1990
1 TCPA 1990 is
amended as follows.
2 In section 78
(appeals against planning decisions and failure to take planning
decisions) after subsection (4)
insert—
“(4A) A notice of
appeal under this section must be accompanied by such information as
may be prescribed by a development
order.
(4B) The power to make a
development order under subsection (4A) is exercisable
by—
(a) the Secretary of
State, in relation to
England;
(b) the Welsh
Ministers, in relation to
Wales.
(4C) Section 333(5) does
not apply in relation to a development order under subsection (4A) made
by the Welsh Ministers.
(4D) A
development order under subsection (4A) made by the Welsh Ministers is
subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of the National
Assembly for Wales.”
3 In
section 195 (appeals against refusal or failure to give decision on
application under section 191 or 192) before subsection (2)
insert—
“(1B) A notice of
appeal under this section must
be—
(a) served within
such time and in such manner as may be prescribed by a development
order;
(b) accompanied by such
information as may be prescribed by such an
order.
(1C) The time prescribed
for the service of a notice of appeal under this section must not be
less than—
(a) 28 days
from the date of notification of the decision on the application;
or
(b) in the case of an appeal
under subsection (1)(b), 28 days
from—
(i) the end of the
period prescribed as mentioned in subsection (1)(b),
or
(ii) as the case may be, the
extended period mentioned in subsection
(1)(b).
(1D) The power to make
a development order under subsection (1B) is exercisable
by—
(a) the Secretary of
State, in relation to
England;
(b) the Welsh
Ministers, in relation to
Wales.
(1E) Section 333(5) does
not apply in relation to a development order under subsection (1B) made
by the Welsh Ministers.
(1F) A
development order under subsection (1B) made by the Welsh Ministers is
subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of the National
Assembly for Wales.”
4 (1) Section 208 (appeals against notices under
section 207) is amended as
follows.
(2) For subsection (4)
substitute—
“(4)
The notice shall—
(a)
indicate the grounds of the
appeal,
(b) state the facts on
which the appeal is based,
and
(c) be accompanied by such
information as may be
prescribed.
(4A) The power to
make regulations under subsection (4)(c) is exercisable
by—
(a) the Secretary of
State, in relation to
England;
(b) the Welsh
Ministers, in relation to
Wales.
(4B) Section 333(3) does
not apply in relation to regulations under subsection (4)(c) made by
the Welsh Ministers.
(4C)
Regulations under subsection (4)(c) made by the Welsh Ministers are
subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of the National
Assembly for Wales.”
(3)
In subsection (5) for “any such appeal” substitute
“an appeal under subsection
(1)”.
Planning (Listed Buildings
and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
5 In
section 21 of the Listed Buildings Act (appeals: supplementary
provisions) after subsection (7)
insert—
“(8) Regulations
under this Act may provide for an appeal under section 20 to be
accompanied by such other information as may be
prescribed.
(9) The power to
make regulations under subsection (8) is exercisable
by—
(a) the Secretary of
State, in relation to
England;
(b) the Welsh
Ministers, in relation to
Wales.
(10) Section 93(3) does
not apply in relation to regulations under subsection (8) made by the
Welsh Ministers.
(11)
Regulations under subsection (8) made by the Welsh Ministers are
subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of the National
Assembly for Wales.”
Planning
(Hazardous Substances) Act 1990
6 In
section 21 of the Hazardous Substances Act (appeals against decisions
and failure to take decisions relating to hazardous substances) after
subsection (3) insert—
“(3A)
A notice of appeal under this section must be accompanied by such
information as may be
prescribed.
(3B) The power to
make regulations under subsection (3A) is exercisable
by—
(a) the Secretary of
State, in relation to
England;
(b) the Welsh
Ministers, in relation to
Wales.
(3C) Section 40(3) does
not apply in relation to regulations under subsection (3A) made by the
Welsh Ministers.
(3D)
Regulations under subsection (3A) made by the Welsh Ministers are
subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of the National
Assembly for Wales.”’.—[John
Healey.]
Brought
up, read the First and Second time, and added to the
Bill.
Ordered
,
That
certain written evidence already reported to the House be appended to
the proceedings of the Committee.—[John
Healey.]
Question
proposed, That the Chairman do report the Bill, as amended, to the
House.
John
Healey:
On a point of order, Sir John. I thank you and
your co-Chair, Mr. Illsley, for keeping us on the straight
and narrow during these proceedings,
and for setting the tone for our deliberations, which has been
productive, efficient and generally
good-humoured.
I
also thank the Clerks, who have provided great advice to you, Sir John,
and to all hon. Members. I would like to thank the Hansard
reporters, who are part of the essential underpinning of the work that
we do. I thank the Doorkeepers too, for keeping the keys
turning—but not too often—during Divisions. I thank the
officials who have given such good support to me and my fellow
Ministers. I particularly appreciate their work and the extent to which
they have allowed me to honour my commitment to the Committee, at the
outset, to ensure that new clauses and amendments would be tabled in
good time. I pay tribute to the interest groups that have followed our
proceedings, including those that gave
evidence.
It
is true that this Committee was not the hottest ticket in town, and
that the Whips and the other Departments suddenly found it much easier
to recruit to other Committees. They sidled up to people and said,
“If you do not do this for me, you’ll be on the Planning
Bill.” Attendance has been strong on both sides of the Committee
and the active involvement in our proceedings has been good. It has
improved our deliberations, including in the evidence session, which I,
like you, Sir John, and the hon. Member for Beckenham experienced for
the first time. We got there in the end, although I have to say that
the procedural points that came before we started taking evidence in
that first sitting were akin to a ward Labour party meeting in their
extent and complexity.
I also pay
tribute to and thank my colleagues as part of the ministerial team.
They have done a great job. I greatly value their support and think
that our deliberations were much the better for having Ministers from
more than one Department.
On the
Opposition, the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy speaks from his
Front Bench and his Back Bench simultaneously, but I guess he is used
to that, and he has done a good job. The hon. Member for North Cornwall
has had to do the same; he was largely on his own during the course of
the Bill. He took us all aback when he talked about the fun that he
used to have in planning inquiries. That gave us all a fresh
perspective on the subject, and perhaps a fresh perspective on him as
well.
As
for the team of three on the Conservative Front Bench, I am sorry that
the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst is not in his place, but we
enjoyed the teamwork. Sometimes they divided the clauses up between
them, sometimes two had a go, and sometimes the third weighed in as
well. My best moment was when the hon. Gentleman was on his feet, just
getting into his stride on applications to the infrastructure planning
commission under part 5, and the hon. Member for Beckenham kept
intervening on him, not to say actually cross-examining him. He was
just getting going when she jumped up and said, “What is the
definition of a project?” and sat down again. Had she done that
to me, I would have been flummoxed, but he handled it with the great
aplomb one would expect from a
lawyer.
All
the best Committees, in my experience, develop a language or a
leitmotif of their own, and we were privileged when the Under-Secretary
of State for Transport talked about modelling in one of our sessions
and then promptly returned to the Committee, slightly chastened,
having been privy to the precise world of the traffic engineers and what
“modelling” really meant and had to correct our
understanding. My
right hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth introduced
the word “traffication”, which even those precise traffic
engineers in the Department for Transport have probably never dreamed
of, but I dare say we will find it appearing in the Department for
Transport’s next Bill. I give the Committee my undertaking that
it will not appear in this Bill while I am in charge of
it.
I thank the
Committee for its work on this stage of the Bill and look forward to
our deliberations continuing in such a productive, constructive and
good-humoured
way.
Mrs.
Lait:
Further to that point of order, Sir John. May I add
my thanks on behalf of my team to you and your co-Chairman for allowing
us a fairly lenient ride on many occasions? I will not be critical at
this stage about how the Bill is constructed, but we were grateful to
you that we could put our comments and amendments into context. That
was much appreciated. I am grateful also to the Clerks, who went above
and beyond the call of duty. We were greatly helped by their skill and
ability.
I also add my
thanks to Hansard. I had an interesting exchange involving
Hansard
. The right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and
Penarth and myself came to the conclusion it was a score draw, and the
accuracy of the reporting led us to that conclusion. Thank goodness for
the Doorkeepers. I have lost count of how many litres of water I have
drunk, and I am hugely grateful for their help.
I am grateful
also to the team, who contributed nobly. It is because I knew that my
hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst could cope that I
gave him such a hard task. I would not do it to many others. I am
grateful to everybody for the part that they played in ensuring that,
as far as possible, we made as many comments, amendments and points as
we could to improve the Bill. We tried to make it a Bill that we could
support, but it is somewhat like the curate’s egg at the moment,
good in parts.
I am grateful
also to hon. Members from the other parties. I am sorry that we could
not always vote with the hon. Member for North Cornwall, but then,
without playing tit-for-tat, there was also a time when he could not
support us. We appreciate the part they played, contributing to the
general good humour and co-operation that, as an Opposition
collectively, we were able to put forward.
It has been
interesting to work opposite the Government team. It is quite difficult
when there are so few of us against massive numbers. We look forward to
reversing the situation in due course, probably sooner than they may
like. However, it was good that we had helpful contributions from so
many Labour Members. In fact, we often came up with similar ideas, few
of which got us very far, but we tried.
It just
remains for me to thank everybody for such a good-humoured Committee,
which, with a bit of luck, we will be able to finish in time so that
the Whips, who were so agitated to begin with about whether we would
deliver the Bill on time, can be reassured that when we say we can
deliver a Bill on time, we will deliver it.
Dan
Rogerson:
Further to that point of order, Sir John.
I would like to thank you and Mr. Illsley for keeping us
under control and steering us back in the direction of the Bill on
occasions when we might have been ranging off it. That is indicative of
the subject matter: planning touches on so many other fields.
I thank the
Clerk and his colleagues in the Public Bill Office for their late-night
advice when I was seeking to table amendments. Although I have sat on
other Public Bill Committees, this is the first time I have led for my
party, so it was a bit of a learning curve. Having been appointed over
Christmas to be shadow spokesman on the Department of Communities and
Local Government, it was quite a quick arrival into dealing with the
subject matter.
It has been
an enjoyable experience. I thank Hansard
,
the
Doorkeepers and officials, some of whom I met in the run-up to the Bill
while trying to clarify some points. That was particularly useful. It
may not have led me to agree with the Government, but at least I knew
what they were saying. It was interesting to see that the ministerial
team had a different style each time a different set of clauses was
reached, and the collective involvement made the whole process more
enjoyable.
It has also
been a pleasure to work with other Opposition Members. Sometimes we
agreed and sometimes we did not, but if we agreed all the time it would
be worrying to our colleagues elsewhere. It was probably reassuring
that we did disagree on some key areas. I agree with the hon. Lady that
parts of the Bill still give cause for concern, and I look forward to
addressing those at a later stage.
Mr.
Llwyd:
Further to that point of order, Sir John. It would
be churlish of me not to take part in this holy alliance—these
valedictories. It has been a genuinely interesting Bill. I nearly said
“a great pleasure,” but I do not want to exaggerate. We
have engaged fully with the subject, and Ministers have done their best
to answer questions. Although there was a bit of a falling out earlier,
generally speaking it was a well-mannered Committee. I thank you, Sir
John, and Mr Illsley, and the other Front-Bench spokesmen.
The Bill is
probably in the same condition as when we started, but we have had
lengthy debates where necessary, which has to be a good thing. I think
we have examined as much as we can. It might be that these matters will
be returned to in another place; I know not. It has been an interesting
experience and I thank everyone involved.
The
Chairman:
I will pass on hon. Members’ kind words
to my co-Chairman, Mr. Illsley. I did not need any
persuasion to act as Chairman for this Bill, since it relates to my own
past professional career, although I am not still in practice. As far
as I am concerned, it is a very interesting Bill and there were
occasions when I had to restrain myself from intervening, but I am
pleased that I managed to avoid doing that.
It has been a
very good natured Committee and the innovation in taking evidence was
beneficial. It worked very well—indeed, much better than I had
expected. Having said all that, I thank hon. Members for their kind
words.
Question put
and agreed
to.
Bill, as
amended, to be
reported.
Committee
rose at one minute past Six
o’clock.
| 
