HC Deb 22 November 1954 vol 533 cc989-91

Lords Amendment: In page 47, line 19, at end insert: Provided that the amount of any such contribution shall not exceed—

  1. (a) the amount of the compensation for depreciation paid by the local planning authority; or
  2. (b) the unexpended balance of established development value at the date of the making of the order of the land in respect of which that compensation was paid.

The Lord Advocate

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Subsection (1) of this Clause provides for the making of contributions by the Secretary of State towards compensation for depreciation paid by a local planning authority in consequence of its having revoked or modified planning permission. The amount of the contribution is to be the compensation which would have been payable under Part II or Part V of the Bill if the permission had been refused in the first instance or granted as subsequently modified. This might not produce a fair result if there had been a marked fall in values between the date of the original decision and the date of the revocation or modification. The Amendment provides against that possibility.

Mr. McInnes

As the Lord Advocate has indicated, this Clause provides for the Secretary of State making contributions towards compensation for depreciation paid by local authorities in consequence of their having revoked or modified planning permission. But the obvious intention of the Amendment is designed to protect the Secretary of State against any fall in the value which may have taken place between the date of the original decision and the date of the revocation or modification.

How do we measure the extent of the depreciation resulting from revocation or modification? I hope the right hon. and learned Gentleman will not say we are to measure it by adopting the old formula of the before and after method. That method is about as complex and intricate as some of the explanations coming from the Lord Advocate; before he makes them we know nothing and after he has made them we know just the same.

In the granting of the contributions is the power of the Secretary of State to be mandatory or permissive? If the right hon. and learned Gentleman will look at page 47 he will see that it says that … the Secretary of State may, subject to the provisions of this section, pay to the local planning authority a contribution … If the local planning authority has already paid compensation for depreciation, why does the Secretary of State have the mere permissive power to grant contributions to the local authority compensating it for the payment made?

The Lord Advocate

On the question of whether the power of the Secretary of State is permissive or mandatory, the word "may" could apply to both. In fact, as I see it, it would be mandatory. On the point about how the figure is to be arrived at and whether it is to be the before and after method, as I understand the situation, it would be calculated by the before and after method. If a better method can be devised no doubt it could be adopted.

Question put, and agreed to.—[Special Entry.]

Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to: In line 38, after "applying" insert: with any necessary modifications.