Orders of the Day — Planning and Compensation Bill [Lords] – in the House of Commons am 6:45 pm ar 19 Mehefin 1991.
Amenthrfents made: No. 142, in page 13, line 35, leave out 'building, engineering, mining or other'
No. 143, in page 14, line 10 leave out from 'force' to end of line 11.
No. 144, in page 14, line 20, leave out from 'force' to end of line 21.
No. 145, in page 15, line 7 leave out 'building, engineering, mining or other'.
No. 146, in page 15, line 15, leave out 'were'.
No. 147, in page 15, line 16, leave out from 'application' to second 'they' in line 17 and insert
'would be lawful if instituted or begun at the time of the application'.
No. 148, in page 15, leave out lines 30 to 33 and insert—
'(4) The lawfulness of any use or operations for which a certificate is in force under this section shall be conclusively presumed unless there is a material change, before the use is instituted or the operations are begun, in any of the matters relevant to determining such lawfulness.'.
No. 149, in page 16, line 16, at end insert—
`(4A) A certificate under section 191 or 192 shall not affect any muter constituting a failure to comply with any condition or limitation subject to which planning permission has been granted unless that matter is described in the certificate.'. —[Sir G. Young.]
Mr Clive Soley
, Hammersmith
7:45,
19 Mehefin 1991
I beg to move Amendment No. 126, in page 16, line 28, at end insert—
'(8) There shall be no fee for submitting applications under section 192.'.
The amendment seeks to ensure that no fee is charged for submitting an application under section 192 of the parent Act, which refers to applications for planning permission under section 69 of that Act and to certificates of lawfulness of existing use or development.
As we are talking about circumstances in which a person wishes to find out whether he already has permission, the provision involves the right to know—the right to information—and it seems wrong that a fee should be charged. I should like to hear the Minister's response to our view that it is wrong to charge someone a fee for providing him with information affecting his current position and that that information ought to be available free of charge.
Tim Yeo
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Environment)
I shall try to be equally brief. I appreciate the reason behind the Amendment, but I am sorry to tell the hon. Gentleman that we intend to resist it.
We consulted widely about the implementation of the provisions of Clause 10, including the possibility of a fee for new section 192 applications. Our view is that, because a "lawful development certificate" granted under the new provisions would be a more valuable and significant document to the applicant than a favourable determination under the present section 64, a fee for the service is justified. More work will be involved for the local authorities in operating the new procedure. For instance, they will have to investigate the lawfulness of existing uses or works on the land and the terms of any planning permission that may exist.
We therefore think it reasonable for planning authorities to be able to charge a fee for that administrative work. We also believe that most developers will accept that it is reasonable to pay a fee as the price for obtaining an authority's considered opinion as to whether their proposal needs planning permission. If a certificate is granted, they will be able to rely on it as an assurance that planning permission is not required. In some cases, that will save them from having to submit a planning application to the local authority.
We are considering the responses to the consultation paper that we issued in January. No final decision has been taken on the proposal to charge a fee. We recognise the need to announce our intentions for implementing the provisions of clause 10, including our intention as regards enabling planning authorities to charge a fee for certificate applications. We hope to make an announcement about that before the summer recess, which would also state when the provisions could be brought into force. Charging a fee for the new section 192 applications would require my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to lay fees regulations before Parliament and those who oppose the idea would have an opportunity to object.
I hope that hon. Members will accept that it is not unreasonble to enable planning authorities to charge a fee to help cover the costs of the new service, which will be of considerable benefit to the people who use it. For that reason, I invite the hon. Gentleman not to press the amendment.
Ministers make up the Government and almost all are members of the House of Lords or the House of Commons. There are three main types of Minister. Departmental Ministers are in charge of Government Departments. The Government is divided into different Departments which have responsibilities for different areas. For example the Treasury is in charge of Government spending. Departmental Ministers in the Cabinet are generally called 'Secretary of State' but some have special titles such as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ministers of State and Junior Ministers assist the ministers in charge of the department. They normally have responsibility for a particular area within the department and are sometimes given a title that reflects this - for example Minister of Transport.
As a bill passes through Parliament, MPs and peers may suggest amendments - or changes - which they believe will improve the quality of the legislation.
Many hundreds of amendments are proposed by members to major bills as they pass through committee stage, report stage and third reading in both Houses of Parliament.
In the end only a handful of amendments will be incorporated into any bill.
The Speaker - or the chairman in the case of standing committees - has the power to select which amendments should be debated.
Secretary of State was originally the title given to the two officials who conducted the Royal Correspondence under Elizabeth I. Now it is the title held by some of the more important Government Ministers, for example the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
A parliamentary bill is divided into sections called clauses.
Printed in the margin next to each clause is a brief explanatory `side-note' giving details of what the effect of the clause will be.
During the committee stage of a bill, MPs examine these clauses in detail and may introduce new clauses of their own or table amendments to the existing clauses.
When a bill becomes an Act of Parliament, clauses become known as sections.
As a bill passes through Parliament, MPs and peers may suggest amendments - or changes - which they believe will improve the quality of the legislation.
Many hundreds of amendments are proposed by members to major bills as they pass through committee stage, report stage and third reading in both Houses of Parliament.
In the end only a handful of amendments will be incorporated into any bill.
The Speaker - or the chairman in the case of standing committees - has the power to select which amendments should be debated.
