| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The noble Baroness said: I shall return briefly to a long amendment that I introduced last time, following which I had a discussion with the Minister, and I thank him for that courtesy, because it was helpful in clarifying my mind as to whether we should continue with the amendment.
Its purpose is to try to ensure that an illegal or unlawful planning process can be stopped, with the powers that are available once an enforcement notice has been issued, in the same way as for a stop notice. Part of the discussion last time related to whether the effect of my amendment could also to the temporary stop notice. Once a stop notice has been issued, as the Minister rightly said to me when we met, it becomes a fact and that stop notice means that people immediately become in breach of the law.
However much the Minister waxes lyrical about the matter, people do not always stop the breach, however much we would like to think so. The Minister asked me to give some examples. In fact, I will refer to Hansard, where the Minister himself gave me some good examples to justify the need for the temporary stop notice. They are exactly the same sort of examples that I would have given. I shall read from Hansard:
The temporary stop notice would be ideal if we also were able to introduce the provisions proposed in the amendment, because it would mean that the temporary stop notice of 28 days would allow the use of section 178 provisions immediately. One would probably end the enforcement problem within a very short time, instead of the months that can now follow.
That is the burden of my long amendment, which has been shortened substantially to the matters I have just mentioned and I hope that, as a result, the Minister will feel able to take the amendment on board, so that we have the means to prevent people who have been committing an offence from carrying on with that offence. I beg to move.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, for her amendment. Although I was not a party to her discussions with my noble friend Lord Rooker, I understand the kinds of cases to which she referred. I can joyously remember, as a local authority leader, having to deal with such matters, having to ensure that residents were leaned on to prevent nuisances continuing and having endlessly to chase officers to do
We have previously rehearsed the arguments relating to this matter. We believe that the powers sought by the amendment are unnecessary. Local planning authorities already have the enforcement notice, which requires activities to stop and remedial action to be taken, including entering and restoring the land. They also have the stop notice, which stops development, but can be served only after or at the same time as the enforcement notice and must relate to the activity prohibited by the enforcement notice.
Local planning authorities will soon have the temporary stop notice to which the noble Baroness referred. That will stop development at once, so that there will be no need to enter land to remove equipment. It is an offence not to comply with a stop notice and will be an offence not to comply with a temporary stop notice. We therefore believe that we have achieved a solution to the problem.
We can argue endlessly about this matter. I believe that we have to give it a go, use what we have put in and ensure that it works well. I hope that will mean that some of the nuisances to which the noble Baroness referred by back-referencing Hansard will be dealt with much more swiftly in the future.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, will the Minister accept from me that the provisions of the temporary stop notice are exactly the same as those of the stop notice? I do not know what the penalties are for breaching those provisions—I have not looked at them—but the penalties exist. If someone carries on and refuses to stop the breach, then nothing more can be done until the enforcement exercise takes place. I know that injunctions can be taken out. So far as I am aware, the temporary stop notice has no powers different from those of the stop notice. If someone chooses to commit a criminal act in breach of a temporary stop notice, our amendment seeks to give power to have that breach stopped and the equipment dismantled and removed.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not believe that the noble Baroness has yet understood exactly how the temporary stop notice process will work. I understand that it will provide the immediate remedy that the noble Baroness seeks and that there will be no need to make enforcements in the way in which she envisages. I believe that it will work in the way that she deems it necessary. That is why we think that her amendment is not required in the circumstances.
Obviously, the noble Baroness is not satisfied. There may be cause for some debate, not on this Bill but in the future. I believe that the Bill provides the remedy that is being sought. I had hoped that my explanations and those of my noble friend Lord Rooker would have satisfied the noble Baroness. We think that the present proposal deals with the problem.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, I can only say that I do not believe that it will. It seems to me—I have
I do not believe that I can take the matter further and I therefore beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 52 [Temporary stop notice]:
"PREVENTION OF ACTIVITIES REQUIRED TO CEASE BY ENFORCEMENT NOTICES AND STOP NOTICES
(1) In section 184(6) of the principal Act (stop notices: supplementary provisions) for "section 187" there is substituted "sections 186A and 187".
(2) After section 186 (compensation for loss due to stop notice) there is inserted the following section—
"186A ENFORCEMENT OF STOP NOTICE
(1) Where any activities required by a stop notice to cease have not ceased before the notice takes effect, the local planning authority may—
(a) enter the land and remove any moveable objects which appear to them to be used for the activities, and
(b) recover from the person who is then the owner or occupier of the land any expenses reasonably incurred by them in doing so.
(2) Where a stop notice has been served or a site notice displayed in respect of any breach of planning control—
(a) any expenses incurred by the owner or occupier of any land for the purpose of complying with the notice, and
(b) any sums paid by the owner or occupier of any land under subsection (1) in respect of expenses incurred by the local planning authority in removing objects,
shall be deemed to be incurred or paid for the use and at the request of the person by whom the breach of planning control was committed.
(3) Regulations made under this Act may provide that—
(a) section 276 of the Public Health Act 1936 (power of local authorities to sell materials removed in executing works under that Act subject to accounting for the proceeds of sale) and
(b) section 294 of that Act (limit on liability of persons holding premises as agents or trustees in respect of the expenses recoverable under that Act),
shall apply, subject to such adaptations and modifications as may be specified in the regulations, in relation to any activities required by a stop notice to cease.
(4) Regulations under subsection (3) applying section 289 of the Public Health Act 1936 may include adaptations and modifications for the purpose of giving the owner of land to which a stop notice relates the right, as against all other persons interested in the land, to comply with the requirements of the stop notice.
(5) Regulations under subsection (3) may also provide for the charging on the land of any expenses recoverable by a local planning authority under subsection (1).
(6) Any person who wilfully obstructs a person acting in the exercise of powers under subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.""
"These might include the inappropriate change of use of someone's backyard to a car paint-spraying business or the construction of an extension without planning permission".—[Official Report, 16/3/04; col. 201.]
I talked about the use of a barn for musical entertainment that was causing a nuisance. There are many good examples where a temporary stop notice is effective, where an enforcement notice could well follow, but where the process of the enforcement notice takes a great deal of time. As part of the enforcement notice, one could go on to the land and take possession of whatever is causing the problem, or take down the building. However, one cannot do that on either a temporary, or a full scale, stop notice. The trouble is that if one cannot do that and one cannot use Section 178, which allows the enforcement action, then the problem will carry on potentially for months—during the enforcement action and the appeal—before anything much can be done.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page