| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
East of England Regional Grand Committee
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 117A(3)),
That the East of England Regional Grand Committee shall meet at Westminster on Tuesday 23 February between 9.00 am and 1.00 pm to take questions under Standing Order No. 117B (Regional Grand Committees (questions for oral answer)) and to hold a general debate on priorities for a future regional strategy. - ( David Wright.)
The House divided: Ayes 284, Noes 83.
AYES
Abbott, Ms Diane
Ainsworth, rh Mr. Bob
Allen, Mr. Graham
Anderson, Mr. David
Anderson, Janet
Armstrong, rh Hilary
Atkins, Charlotte
Austin, Mr. Ian
Austin, John
Bailey, Mr. Adrian
Bain, Mr. William
Balls, rh Ed
Banks, Gordon
Barlow, Ms Celia
Barron, rh Mr. Kevin
Begg, Miss Anne
Beith, rh Sir Alan
Bell, Sir Stuart
Benn, rh Hilary
Berry, Roger
Betts, Mr. Clive
Blackman, Liz
Blackman-Woods, Dr. Roberta
Blears, rh Hazel
Borrow, Mr. David S.
Bradshaw, rh Mr. Ben
Brennan, Kevin
Brooke, Annette
Brown, Lyn
Brown, rh Mr. Nicholas
Brown, Mr. Russell
Browne, Mr. Jeremy
Bryant, Chris
Buck, Ms Karen
Burgon, Colin
Burnham, rh Andy
Butler, Ms Dawn
Caborn, rh Mr. Richard
Cairns, David
Campbell, Mr. Alan
Campbell, Mr. Ronnie
Carmichael, Mr. Alistair
Caton, Mr. Martin
Cawsey, Mr. Ian
Challen, Colin
Chapman, Ben
Chaytor, Mr. David
Clapham, Mr. Michael
Clark, Ms Katy
Clarke, rh Mr. Tom
Clelland, Mr. David
Coaker, Mr. Vernon
Coffey, Ann
Cook, Frank
Cooper, Rosie
Corbyn, Jeremy
Crausby, Mr. David
Creagh, Mary
Cruddas, Jon
Cryer, Mrs. Ann
Cummings, John
Cunningham, Mr. Jim
Cunningham, Tony
David, Mr. Wayne
Davies, Mr. Dai
Dean, Mrs. Janet
Denham, rh Mr. John
Dhanda, Mr. Parmjit
Dismore, Mr. Andrew
Dobbin, Jim
Dobson, rh Frank
Donohoe, Mr. Brian H.
Doran, Mr. Frank
Dowd, Jim
Drew, Mr. David
Eagle, Angela
Eagle, Maria
Efford, Clive
Ellman, Mrs. Louise
Engel, Natascha
Etherington, Bill
Featherstone, Lynne
Field, rh Mr. Frank
Fitzpatrick, Jim
Flello, Mr. Robert
Flint, rh Caroline
Flynn, Paul
Follett, Barbara
Foster, Mr. Don
Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings and Rye)
Francis, Dr. Hywel
Gapes, Mike
George, rh Mr. Bruce
Gerrard, Mr. Neil
Gilroy, Linda
Godsiff, Mr. Roger
Goldsworthy, Julia
Goodman, Helen
Griffiths, Nigel
Grogan, Mr. John
Hall, Patrick
Hamilton, Mr. David
Hanson, rh Mr. David
Harman, rh Ms Harriet
Harris, Mr. Tom
Harvey, Nick
Havard, Mr. Dai
Healey, rh John
Heath, Mr. David
Hemming, John
Henderson, Mr. Doug
Hepburn, Mr. Stephen
Hesford, Stephen
Heyes, David
Hill, rh Keith
Hillier, Meg
Hodgson, Mrs. Sharon
Holmes, Paul
Hood, Mr. Jim
Hoon, rh Mr. Geoffrey
Hope, Phil
Hopkins, Kelvin
Horwood, Martin
Howarth, David
Howarth, rh Mr. George
Howells, rh Dr. Kim
Hoyle, Mr. Lindsay
Humble, Mrs. Joan
Iddon, Dr. Brian
Illsley, Mr. Eric
Irranca-Davies, Huw
James, Mrs. Siân C.
Jenkins, Mr. Brian
Johnson, rh Alan
Johnson, Ms Diana R.
Jones, Helen
Jones, Mr. Kevan
Jones, Mr. Martyn
Jowell, rh Tessa
Joyce, Mr. Eric
Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald
Keeley, Barbara
Keen, Ann
Kemp, Mr. Fraser
Khan, rh Mr. Sadiq
Kidney, Mr. David
Kilfoyle, Mr. Peter
Knight, rh Jim
Kumar, Dr. Ashok
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen
Lamb, Norman
Lammy, rh Mr. David
Laws, Mr. David
Laxton, Mr. Bob
Lazarowicz, Mark
Lepper, David
Levitt, Tom
Linton, Martin
Lloyd, Tony
Lucas, Ian
Mackinlay, Andrew
Mactaggart, Fiona
Malik, Mr. Shahid
Mallaber, Judy
Mann, John
Marsden, Mr. Gordon
Martlew, Mr. Eric
McAvoy, rh Mr. Thomas
McCabe, Steve
McCafferty, Chris
McCarthy, Kerry
McCarthy-Fry, Sarah
McDonagh, Siobhain
McDonnell, John
McGovern, Mr. Jim
McGuire, rh Mrs. Anne
McIsaac, Shona
McKechin, Ann
McKenna, Rosemary
McNulty, rh Mr. Tony
Meale, Mr. Alan
Merron, Gillian
Michael, rh Alun
Miliband, rh David
Miliband, rh Edward
Miller, Andrew
Moffatt, Laura
Mole, Chris
Moon, Mrs. Madeleine
Moore, Mr. Michael
Morden, Jessica
Morgan, Julie
Morley, rh Mr. Elliot
Mulholland, Greg
Mullin, Mr. Chris
Munn, Meg
Murphy, Mr. Denis
Murphy, rh Mr. Paul
Norris, Dan
O'Brien, rh Mr. Mike
O'Hara, Mr. Edward
Olner, Mr. Bill
Osborne, Sandra
Owen, Albert
Palmer, Dr. Nick
Pearson, Ian
Pelling, Mr. Andrew
Plaskitt, Mr. James
Pope, Mr. Greg
Pound, Stephen
Prentice, Bridget
Prentice, Mr. Gordon
Prescott, rh Mr. John
Primarolo, rh Dawn
Prosser, Gwyn
Purchase, Mr. Ken
Purnell, rh James
Raynsford, rh Mr. Nick
Reed, Mr. Andy
Reed, Mr. Jamie
Reid, rh John
Rennie, Willie
Riordan, Mrs. Linda
Robertson, John
Robinson, Mr. Geoffrey
Rogerson, Dan
Rooney, Mr. Terry
Rowen, Paul
Roy, Mr. Frank
Roy, Lindsay
Ruddock, Joan
Russell, Bob
Ryan, rh Joan
Salter, Martin
Seabeck, Alison
Shaw, Jonathan
Sheerman, Mr. Barry
Sheridan, Jim
Simon, Mr. Siôn
Skinner, Mr. Dennis
Slaughter, Mr. Andy
Smith, Ms Angela C. (Sheffield, Hillsborough)
Smith, Geraldine
Smith, rh Jacqui
Smith, Sir Robert
Snelgrove, Anne
Soulsby, Sir Peter
Southworth, Helen
Spink, Bob
Starkey, Dr. Phyllis
Stewart, Ian
Straw, rh Mr. Jack
Stringer, Graham
Stuart, Ms Gisela
Sutcliffe, Mr. Gerry
Swinson, Jo
Tami, Mark
Taylor, Ms Dari
Taylor, Matthew
Taylor, Dr. Richard
Teather, Sarah
Thomas, Mr. Gareth
Thurso, John
Timms, rh Mr. Stephen
Todd, Mr. Mark
Touhig, rh Mr. Don
Truswell, Mr. Paul
Ussher, Kitty
Waltho, Lynda
Webb, Steve
Whitehead, Dr. Alan
Williams, rh Mr. Alan
Williams, Mrs. Betty
Williams, Stephen
Willott, Jenny
Wills, rh Mr. Michael
Wilson, Phil
Winnick, Mr. David
Winterton, rh Ms Rosie
Wright, Mr. Anthony
Wright, David
Wright, Dr. Tony
Wyatt, Derek
Younger-Ross, Richard
Tellers for the Ayes:
Mr. George Mudie and
Mr. Dave Watts
NOES
Arbuthnot, rh Mr. James
Atkinson, Mr. Peter
Bacon, Mr. Richard
Bellingham, Mr. Henry
Benyon, Mr. Richard
Binley, Mr. Brian
Bone, Mr. Peter
Boswell, Mr. Tim
Bottomley, Peter
Brokenshire, James
Browning, Angela
Burns, Mr. Simon
Burrowes, Mr. David
Burt, Alistair
Carswell, Mr. Douglas
Cash, Mr. William
Clappison, Mr. James
Crabb, Mr. Stephen
Davies, David T.C. (Monmouth)
Davies, Philip
Dorries, Nadine
Duddridge, James
Fabricant, Michael
Field, Mr. Mark
Fraser, Christopher
Goodman, Mr. Paul
Goodwill, Mr. Robert
Gray, Mr. James
Green, Damian
Grieve, Mr. Dominic
Hands, Mr. Greg
Harper, Mr. Mark
Hayes, Mr. John
Heald, Mr. Oliver
Heathcoat-Amory, rh Mr. David
Hogg, rh Mr. Douglas
Horam, Mr. John
Howarth, Mr. Gerald
Howell, John
Jack, rh Mr. Michael
Jackson, Mr. Stewart
Jones, Mr. David
Knight, rh Mr. Greg
Lait, Mrs. Jacqui
Leigh, Mr. Edward
Liddell-Grainger, Mr. Ian
Loughton, Tim
Main, Anne
Maples, Mr. John
Mates, rh Mr. Michael
McLoughlin, rh Mr. Patrick
Miller, Mrs. Maria
Milton, Anne
Murrison, Dr. Andrew
Ottaway, Richard
Paice, Mr. James
Paterson, Mr. Owen
Penning, Mike
Prisk, Mr. Mark
Randall, Mr. John
Robathan, Mr. Andrew
Robertson, Mr. Laurence
Rosindell, Andrew
Scott, Mr. Lee
Selous, Andrew
Simpson, Mr. Keith
Spicer, Sir Michael
Stanley, rh Sir John
Steen, Mr. Anthony
Streeter, Mr. Gary
Stuart, Mr. Graham
Taylor, Mr. Ian
Turner, Mr. Andrew
Tyrie, Mr. Andrew
Vara, Mr. Shailesh
Walter, Mr. Robert
Waterson, Mr. Nigel
Whittingdale, Mr. John
Wiggin, Bill
Wilson, Mr. Rob
Winterton, Ann
Winterton, Sir Nicholas
Yeo, Mr. Tim
Tellers for the Noes:
Mr. Philip Dunne and
Jeremy Wright
Question accordingly agreed to.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): We come to the motion on section 5 of the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993. [Interruption.] Motion not moved.
Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have here a ludicrous situation in which the Government are trying to sneak things through at the end of the day's business. They are quite happy to move motions when there is no time for debate, but when there is roughly an hour to debate an issue, they do not want to move the motion. Can anything be done to make sure that motions on the Order Paper are moved when there is time to debate them in the House?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I say to the hon. Gentleman that we have done everything within the normal rules of the House; the Government's actions are a matter for the Government.
petition
Swimming Pool (Canvey Island)
9.6 pm
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Ind):
The people of Canvey love our island and treasure its heritage. They are indebted to campaigners Lea and Liz Swann and to Councillor Dave Blackwell for trying to reverse a decision to destroy an important part of Canvey Island's seafront-
the tidal pool. I am indebted to the 127 people who attended the public meeting last week and voted unanimously to retain the pool to keep our children on Canvey Island safer. They are calling on the borough councillors to rescind their decision.
The Petition of Liz and Lea Swann, residents of Canvey Island and others,
Declares that they support and want to protect and enhance the Canvey Sea Front area and therefore object to the proposed removal of the swimming pool at the far end of Concord Beach; notes that the swimming pool is enjoyed by many local residents, particularly children, forms an important and historic part of the iconic Canvey Seafront, is important to local businesses that rely on the visitors for income during the summer months, and would cost very little to maintain; further declares that retaining the pool is by far the safer option and that this proposal has been made without any consultation of residents or businesses at all, that the council has not published any costs or proposals for consideration, has not consulted the Environment Agency on the environmental impact to the beach and surrounding properties, did not include Canvey Island's Town Councillors in discussions; that for these and many other valid reasons this proposal should be withdrawn by the mainland Conservative Borough Councillors, and that given the importance to the wider community of protecting this local beach attraction, the Council must properly and widely consult the public before making any decision.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons press the Government to urge Castle Point Borough Council, and the Conservative Council Group, to reject this proposal and instead spend public funds on the swimming pool's upkeep.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
[P000725]
Children's Homes (Planning Applications)
Motion made, and Question proposed , That this House do now adjourn.- (David Wright.)
9.8 pm
Ann Coffey (Stockport) (Lab): Children's homes should provide a safe, positive and caring environment for young people who are unable to live at home. It is important that they provide the highest standards of care. Over the years, care and inspection of children's homes has been subject to changes. Indeed, before the Care Standards Act 2000, homes with fewer than four children did not have to be registered at all. Quite rightly, inspection is becoming more rigorous, and I welcome the new draft minimum care standards, issued by the Department for Children, Schools and Families, on which Ofsted will base future inspections. That is happening in response to the changing nature of children's homes over the years.
When I first worked as a social worker in Stockport in the 1980s, small family-type care homes provided a family environment for quite young children. The carers were often a couple resident in the home. Now, of course, younger children are placed in foster families and the young people placed in children's homes are older. They present very difficult and challenging behaviour and often come into care with multiple problems and complex needs.
In Stockport, a high number of children and young people are placed in our children's homes from other local authority areas. Some 53 per cent. of all looked-after children are from outside the borough, compared with the national average of 35 per cent. Our percentage is one of the highest in the country. Many of the children who live in the homes about which residents have complained to me are from outside Stockport and are young offenders. Owners sometimes charge up to £4,500 a week per child and some advertise aggressively in other boroughs for "priority and prolific offenders".
In Stockport, we have more than 30 private registered children's homes-the third highest number in the country-and we can bear testament to the changing nature of those homes, given the problems that we have encountered with antisocial behaviour. It is important to improve outcomes for vulnerable, often difficult young people in care, but it is also important to ensure that proper consideration is given to the location of the home.
Standard 23 in the draft minimum standards, entitled "The design and location of the home", says:
"Location is carefully considered at the planning stage for a new home...The home is situated in a location which takes into account the safety and protection of children living there and the community."
That presumes the existence of some planning process, as well as a registration process.
Tonight I want to focus on the planning legislation that applies to children's homes. I decided to take up the issue again after a recent influx of letters and e-mails from distressed Stockport constituents who have suffered verbal abuse and other forms of antisocial behaviour from the residents of nearby children's homes. My constituents made the point that they were never consulted about the change of use.
One of my constituents lives with his mother next door to a children's home. He told me about their "monumentally distressing situation". He and his mother have been subjected to much abuse and damage to their home. He described how the home for young people came into existence without local people knowing anything about it or being given any say in the change of use from a private dwelling house. It turns out that the house next door was classified under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 to be in use class C3-a dwelling house, which covers use by a single person or by people living together as a family that has not more than six residents living together as a single household and can include a home where care is provided to residents.
My constituent wrote to Stockport council and was told that no planning breaches had occurred, as a domestic property could be converted, under use C3, into a facility for care for up to six residents living as a single household, without anyone seeking planning permission or consulting local residents. However, a planning application would have been required if residential accommodation and care to people in need of care were being provided, other than use within class C3, as that would fall within class C2. Apart from being a somewhat circular definition, that is very confusing. When is a children's home a residential provision where care is being provided-that is, a C2 use-and when is it a single household where care is provided and therefore a C3 use? It seems to depend on the number of persons, according to the local planning authority.
The then Office of the Deputy Prime Minister issued a circular in March 2005, adding some guidance on use classes C2 and C3. I quote:
"The amended Order does not make any changes to class C3: Dwelling houses. This class groups together use as a dwelling house, whether or not the sole or main residence, by single person, any number of persons living together as a family, or by no more than 6 persons living together as a single household. The key element in the use of a dwelling house for non-family purposes is the concept of a single household. The single household concept will provide more certainty over the planning position of small group homes which play a major role in the Government's community care policy which is aimed at enabling disabled and mentally disordered people to live as normal lives as possible in touch with the community.
In the case of small residential care homes or nursing homes, staff and residents will probably not live as a single household and the use will therefore fall into the residential institutions"-
"regardless of the size of the home. Local planning authorities should include any resident care staff in their calculation of the number of people accommodated."
Clearly, the guidance all hangs on the definition of a single household, not care staffing, as care can be provided both in a dwelling house and in a residential home. What is this entity, a single household? In its briefing note to me, the House of Commons Library said that the definition of
"living together as a single household"
is one for case law and not always straightforward. The researcher quoted the Sweet and Maxwell "Encyclopedia of Planning Law and Practice," which states:
"The control limit of six persons defines the scope of the right, but does not imply that any excess in numbers must constitute a breach of planning control. Where, for example, premises have
been put to this use and six people have lived together as a single household, there will subsequently be a material change in use only where the total number of residents increases to the point where it can be said that the use has intensified so as to become of a different character, or the residents no longer live as a single household, (which may then fall to be regarded as a hostel use, or house let in lodgings)."
So there we have it-as clear as mud! This does not shed any light on what defines a single household. However, it is this definition and not numbers or care which is key to determining C2 or C3 use.
The lack of clarity has been a particular issue with houses in multiple occupation where high concentrations have increased antisocial behaviour and had adverse environmental impact on the wider community. It has resulted in an increase in houses in multiple occupation without any planning process because they have been deemed to fall into C3 use-a dwelling house with people living together as a single household. In response to the problems, the Department for Communities and Local Government issued a consultation on HMOs and possible planning responses. The responses were published last week, on 27 January, and the most popular planning request was that the use classes order be amended to provide a specific definition of an HMO which removed the ambiguity of the term
"living together as a single household".
Following the recent complaints about a children's home in my constituency, I wrote to the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley, North (Mr. Austin), and received a reply on 8 October last year which made it plain that the position was not as clear-cut as Stockport council had initially indicated, and that a range of factors on a case-by-case basis should be taken into account in determining whether a change of use from dwelling house use to residential institution had taken place.
I am pleased to say that Stockport has now issued new planning guidance, which states:
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |