| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Business without Debate
Delegated Legislation
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence) (Housing) (Fire Safety) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 28 January, be approved.
That the draft National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence) (Local Government) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 10 February, be approved.
That the draft National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence) (Education) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 24 February, be approved.
That the draft National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence) (Culture and Other Fields) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 24 February, be approved.- ( Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)),
That the draft Children Act 2004 Information Database (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 28 January, be approved.- ( Mark Tami.)
The Deputy Speaker's opinion as to the decision of the Question being challenged, the Division was deferred until Wednesday 7 April (Standing Order No. 41A).
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Charities (Disclosure of Revenue and Customs Information to the Charity Commission for Northern Ireland) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 28 January, be approved.- ( Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No.118 (6)),
That the draft Financial Assistance Scheme (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 3 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007 (Variation of Reimbursement and Other Administrative Arrangements) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 3 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (Code of Practice for Interviews of Witnesses Notified by Accused) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 5 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Building Societies (Insolvency and Special Administration) (Amendment) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 8 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Local Education Authorities and Children's Services Authorities (Integration of Functions) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 10 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Jobseeker's Allowance (Work for Your Benefit Pilot Scheme) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 24 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Additional Paternity Leave (Adoptions from Overseas) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 24 February, be approved.
That the draft Additional Statutory Paternity Pay (Adoptions from Overseas) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 23 February, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Building Societies (Financial Assistance) Order 2010, which was laid before this House on 1 March, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the Legal Services Commission Funding Code: Criteria and Procedures, a copy of which was laid before this House on 8 March, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That the draft Criminal Defence Service (Information Requests) (Amendment) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 27 January, be approved ).
That the draft Criminal Defence Service (Representation Orders: Appeals, etc.) (Amendment) Regulations 2010, which were laid before this House on 28 January, be approved.- (Mark Tami.)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Order, 22 March, and Standing Order No. 118 (6)),
That this House authorises the Secretary of State to undertake to pay, and to pay, by way of financial assistance under section 8 of the Industrial Development Act 1982, sums exceeding £10 million and up to a cumulative total of £380 million in respect of a guarantee which may be provided by the Secretary of State to the European Investment Bank in the event of a European Investment Bank loan to Ford Motor Company Limited.- (Mark Tami.)
European Union Documents
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 119 (11)),
That this House takes note of European Union Documents No. 7110/10, Commission Communication on Europe 2020-a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, No. 6018/10,
Commission staff working document on Europe 2020-public consultation-first overview of responses, and No. 6037/10, Commission staff working document-Lisbon Strategy evaluation document; and supports the Government's approach to promoting an EU strategy focused on delivering strong, sustainable and balanced growth.- ( Mark Tami.)
The Deputy Speaker's opinion as to the decision of the Question being challenged, the Division was deferred until Wednesday 7 April (Standing Order No. 41A).
petitions
Planning and Development (Hadleigh, Essex)
12 midnight
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Ind): Kelly and Ian King and many other excellent caring local people have compiled this petition in response to a development proposal that is entirely out of keeping with and intrusive on their environment, putting intolerable pressures on our roads and public services and therefore the residents' quality of life.
The Petition of local residents and others objecting to the back garden development of eight flats in two blocks at 21 Lynton Road Hadleigh,
Declares that the proposed development is out of character with the area, has insufficient parking and garden amenity space, would make an unacceptable imposition on the street scene, is by its bulk and design over obtrusive, would make unacceptable impositions on local road congestion, and on fresh water demand and sewage and surface water disposal, would make local road junctions serving the streets more dangerous, does not provide suitable access to the site from the road and would create disturbance, noise and other problems for local residents; further notes that there is sufficient previously developed land to provide all the housing needs for this region without such intensive building in the green belt or back gardens and that the council is under no obligation or pressure from the Government to vote for this application if it chooses not to.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press Castle Point Borough Council, and the Conservative Council Group, to ensure this application is decided by councillors who can be held to account, rather than officers, and that it is rejected.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.
Planning and Development (Benfleet, Essex)
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Ind): This petition was organised by Brian Keeler, a superb campaigner, well known and valued by his community for the work he does. He is campaigning against totally inappropriate development, which I urge councillors to reject. The petition is a long one; it will be printed in Hansard.
Following is the full text of the petition:
[ The Petition of Brian Keeler, the residents of Castle Point and others,
Declares that they object to the proposed development of the area between Nos. 18 to 32 High Road, Benfleet to construct a building providing 5 Retail Units at Ground Level, 22 Parking Spaces, 2 Offices, plus 12 x 2 bed flats and 2 x 1 bed flats at 1st and 2nd floor levels; that this development should be rejected because the proposed, much larger building would dominate and overlook existing properties, bring unacceptable problems including inadequate
parking, fails to show where access to and from the site parking area, bearing in mind an existing public parking area in Adelaide Gardens, vague refuse storage area, restricted sight lines for emerging traffic from St Mary's Drive, reduction of the pavement, loss of light entering adjoining buildings and relocation of the heritage telephone kiosk and post box; further declares that this development would further spoil the Conservation Area and create unacceptable stress on the existing infrastructure, including roads, schools, rail, doctors, dentists, etc.; that for these and many other valid planning reasons this application be rejected by the local Councillors, elected to represent their constituents, and that given the importance to the wider community of protecting this unique Conservation Area, unelected and unaccountable officers must properly and widely consult the public before permitting such developments.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press Castle Point Borough Council, and all Councillors, to reject this planning application and to substantially protect the unique St Mary's Conservation area.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. ]
Bus Service (Essex)
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Ind): This is my third petition, which you will be glad to hear, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is my last in this Parliament. It was produced by Carol Tebbutt, the wonderful people of Age Concern and others in Castle Point who want to see an improved bus service. My goodness, we all want to see that. The petition is long and will be printed in Hansard.
Following is the full text of the petition:
[ The Petition of Carol Tebbutt, members of Age Concern Canvey Island, the residents of Castle Point and others,
Declares that they object to the reduction in frequency of low-floor buses operating on the number 21 bus route between Southend and Canvey Island, operated by FirstGroup; that this reduction in the number of low-floor buses discriminates against passengers with greater accessibility needs, including the elderly, infirm, adults accompanying small children and those with limited mobility; further, that this route is used by residents travelling to and from Southend Hospital and requiring frequent, accessible, reliable and comfortable bus services; that for these and many other valid reasons only low-floor buses be operated by FirstGroup on this route and at greater frequency.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press FirstGroup to operate only low-floor buses and at shorter intervals on the number 21 bus route between Southend and Canvey Island.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. ]
High School Provision (Stoke-on-Trent South)
Mr. Robert Flello (Stoke-on-Trent, South) (Lab):
Stoke-on-Trent city council has today turned a £250 million Building Schools for the Future success story into a disaster, but all is not lost. The council-Conservative-run at the moment-can still do the right thing. In line with what the Schools Minister has repeatedly said, we can have a two-school solution-keeping a community school at Mitchell High, while building the new 20:20 academy
on the Longton High site. I have with me tonight the start of a petition, which is still gathering hundreds of signatures. The petition calls for the two-school solution that the people of Stoke-on-Trent want. It reads:
The Petition of the undersigned,
Declares that there is a desire among the people of the city of Stoke-on-Trent that there should be a High School serving the communities of Longton, Meir, Weston Coyney, Normacot, Dresden, and other areas in that vicinity.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |