|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Baroness Linklater of Butterstone: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the majority of women remanded or sentenced to prison are involved in one way or another with illegal drugs? In Styal, for example, 75 per cent of receptions have drug problems. What effect does the Minister believe that the closure of the two units will have on the ability of the Prison Service to deal with those problems?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, those issues are being addressed. As I have tried to make clear, the needs of the women were fully taken into consideration before the decision to move them was taken.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the Government's policy is and remains to focus new retail development in or on the edge of town and city centres. There is no intention to change that. We have consulted on a new
Lord Hanningfield: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. I do not think that people who read the new draft guidance would interpret it in that way. They are interpreting it as a licence to build many more out-of-town centres. Will the Minister comment on that? The noble Lord and I, and many other noble Lords, recently spent many hours debating the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill. During those debates there was a good deal of discussion about the regeneration of town centres. I think that the guidance is contrary to the discussions we have been having about rejuvenating town centres and encouraging their development and it is contrary to the suggestions of his noble friend Lord Rogers about town development. I should like the Minister to comment on those points. This is a licence to build many more out-of-town centres rather than developing the high street, which we feel is very important.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not see PPS6 in its draft form in that way and we should remember that it is only a draft. Perhaps it would be worth me reminding your Lordships' House of the Government's aims as set out in paragraph 1.2 of the planning policy statement. It states that it,
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, my understanding is that when the Government decide to revise or review existing policy they consult widely within government. I am sure that that is true across government. My understanding is that the draft PPS6 reflects consultation with a range of departments, including Her Majesty's Treasury, the DTI and Defra.
Baroness Maddock: My Lords, the draft PPS6 clearly favours large format stores. Can the Minister assure the House that PPG6, which has been in operation for the past seven years and has helped to protect our town centres, will not be undermined by the final draft of PPS6? Can he further assure the House that it will not undermine the amendment to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill moved by his
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, we were more than happy to strengthen our position with regard to out-of-town and out-of-city-centre stores by putting in the "mezzanine amendment". That is an accurate reflection of the Government's policy intent. We are whole-heartedly behind our existing policy. It has worked extremely well. An evaluation in January this year confirmed support for concentrating on town centres. There is no doubt that PPG6, in its old form, has influenced a change in retail patterns and that major stores have responded positively to that. After nearly 20 years of everything moving out of town, new floor space in town centre schemes now exceeds that in out-of-town shopping centres and retail warehouse parks. We see that as a badge of success for this Government's policy in supporting "town centres first" developments.
Lord Bradshaw: My Lords, is the Minister aware that many of us are relieved by what he has just said, which is contrary to the newspaper headlines? Will he also say that existing out-of-town stores should not be allowed to expand? Will he confirm that public transport can work effectively only if it serves stores that are located in town centres?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, it is dangerous to be prescriptive on these matters. If the noble Lord thinks carefully about his statements, there is a danger in that. It is dangerous to say that one can have good public transport only in city centres and that one cannot have good public transport on the edge of town or in out-of-town areas. Our policy is very clear. We favour, support and want to see the continued development and regeneration of our city centres as the major centres for retail development in the future. That is the policy intent behind the revised PPS6.
Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, is my noble friend aware how much pleasure it gave to some of his noble friends to hear him say that the Government fully support their own policy? Perhaps he can tell us when the Government will support their own policy on other issues, such as House of Lords reform.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, for the benefit of those noble Lords who do not know the technicalities of the subject, can the Minister explain the difference between a PPG and a PPS? Is it the case that changing "guidance" into a "statement" will be a significant move away from advice towards instruction?
Lord Grocott: My Lords, with permission, I think that it would be helpful if I said a word about today's business. It looks a little more crowded than it appeared to be when the usual channels scheduled it last week. We have tried to take action to deal with that and this is how we hope that the day will pan out. The Children Bill, which now has far more speakers than it did when we planned the business, will now start as soon as possible after 5 p.m. and it will go through to a conclusion. The three orders that are down for consideration after the Children Bill have been rescheduled, with agreement, to after tomorrow's business, which makes more sense. It still leaves today quite busy. It means that we are likely to run beyond the target time of 10 p.m. but if all noble Lords contributing to the Children Bill are able to confine their remarks to around eight minutes we would finish before 11 p.m. I think that that would meet with general approval.
Moved, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the Whole House to which the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill has been committed that they consider the Bill in the following order: