§
Lords Amendment: In page 32, line 42, at end insert:
together with a copy of the application and such other information relating thereto and to the decision as the Greater London Council may reasonably require".
§ Sir K. JosephI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This Amendment requires the London boroughs to send to the G.L.C., not only their planning decisions but copies of planning applications they may receive, 1844 in order that the G.L.C. can be kept in close touch with the trend of development proposals.
§ 6.15 p.m.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonObviously everyone will agree with this Amendment, because it makes common sense. It is extraordinary to think that the Bill in its original form laid it down that the boroughs could consider these matters but only send their decision to the Greater London Council. How would the Greater London Council make an intelligent judgment without knowing more about the original application? I hope that we shall not be criticised for not putting down an Amendment. We on this side of the House put down a large number of Amendments during the earlier stages. I cannot refrain from drawing attention to the slipshod and hurried way in which the Bill was framed in the first place.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendment agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment: In page 33, line 7, leave out from "whom" to "to" in line 8 and insert:
there is received—
shall forward the application".
§ Sir K. JosephI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
Where an application is made under Section 43 of the planning Act, and the decision is whether any particular development is such development as requires planning permission, the planning application might be such as to fall to be decided by the London borough or might be such as to fall to be decided by the Greater London Council. All the Amendment does is to make sure that where the application is of the latter type, and so falls in the category where the decision is with the Greater London Council, the decision under Section 43 must also be taken by the Greater London Council.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI should have checked this before, but it is so difficult to keep up with these changes. Do I understand this to be the old Section 17 of the Act?
§ Sir K. JosephI think that the hon. Gentleman has me there. In the consolidation Act it is Section 43. If I correctly describe what was in Section 17, I agree with the hon. Gentleman.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment: In page 33, line 42, after "(b)" insert "(i)".
§ Sir K. JosephI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonThe significance and importance of these Amendments and this part of the Bill can only be gauged when we know what the Minister will put in his regulations. We are now passing a very considerable portion of this Measure dealing with important planning provisions, the effect of which we cannot possibly judge until we know what is what in the Minister's regulations. This is another instance of where, in planning, far from giving more power and authority to local authorities, we are giving them to the Minister, who will decide what classes and cases will be dealt with by the Clause. They may include practically everything—any type of development—or very little. Until we have that information, it is quite impossible for the House or the country to decide on this part of the Bill. I put on record my own personal objection to the Minister taking so much power to prescribe very important matters purely by regulations. If ever there was a case of the man in Whitehall knowing best, this Amendment is a good example of it
§ Mrs. Joyce Butler (Wood Green)In Standing Committee I pressed the Minister to give us some idea of what he had in mind. I should have thought that at this stage we could have had some explanation of what it was intended to include and exclude. It would have been helpful if we could have discussed these regulations in the House. I am sorry that the Minister has not got so far as that. I support what my hon. Friend has just said. We are very much in the dark, and we shall have to reserve our judg- 1846 ment on this matter until we know what the Minister intends to do.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment: In page 34, line 17, leave out "and compensation".
§ Sir K. JosephI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This and the next Amendment in line 18 go together. Their purpose is to ensure that where any agreement is made under Clause 24(7) which involves the transfer of staffs, then officers affected shall be entitled to exactly the same safeguards as are ensured by Clause 82 in respect of officers affected by orders made under the Bill.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI have read the relevant parts of the debate in another place and I must say that I am little wiser than I was. I still do not understand why this matter has to be dealt with in this Clause. I can well understand the provision as to regulations in Clause 82. I know there was a provision in connection with some transferred officers who might be affected by the new arrangements, but I do not understand why the matter has to be dealt with here, or what the effect is. Neither do I understand why "and compensation" is to be left out.
§ Dr. Alan GlynI presume that all this Amendment does is to put all categories of employees in the same position as they are under Clause 82, about which some of us will have something to say later. Is that the case?
§ Sir K. JosephMy hon. Friend the Member for Clapham (Dr. Alan Glyn) is quite right. In answer to the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (Mr. Skeffington), the words "and compensation" are left out frim their present position in line 17 because suitable words are added by the next Amendment at the end of line 18 referring to the compensation provisions brought in under Clause 82.
We need to put in such a reference to compensation in Clause 24 because in previous subsections arrangements were made for the transfer of functions between various authorities which might lead to the transfer of staff. In other words, this is part of a linked series of Amendments, 1847 ensuring that where any staff is transferred between London authorities they will get the benefit of Clause 82.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment: In page 34, line 18, at end insert:
and any such agreement shall include provisions in accordance with section 82(3) of this Act for the protection of the interests of such officers.
After Amendment last inserted, insert—
(8) In relation to land in a London borough or the City—
- (a) references to local planning authorities in any of the following enactments, that is to say—
- (i) sections 33 and 34 of, and Schedule 2 to, the Electricity Act 1957;
- (ii) section 108 of, and Schedule 12 to, the Highways Act 1959;
- (iii) Schedule 1 to the Pipe-lines Act 1962,
- shall be construed as including references to the Greater London Council but not to the borough council or the Common Council;
- (b) the reference in section 86(4) of the Transport Act 1962 to the local planning authority to whom application is made for permission for the development in question shall be construed as a reference to the local planning authority by whom that application falls to be dealt with;
- (c) references in section 3(2) of the Acquisition of Land (Authorisation Procedure) Act 1946 to the local planning authority shall be construed as including references both to the Greater London Council and to the borough council or, as the case may be, the Common Council;
- (d) any reference in section 17 or 20 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 to the local planning authority shall be construed as a reference to the borough council or, as the case may be, the Common Council;
- (e) any reference in Part III of the Land Compensation Act 1961 to the local planning authority shall be construed as a reference to the borough council or, as the case may be, the Common Council; but that council shall consult with the Greater London Council before issuing a certificate under section 17 of that Act in any case where an application for planning permission for any development to which the certificate would relate would fall to be dealt with by the Greater London Council."
§ Sir K. JosephI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This part of the Bill makes provision for the planning responsibilities within London, but there are a number of other 1848 statutes which refer to planning authorities and it is necessary at some point in this Bill to define exactly what, for the purposes of the other Statutes, the "planning authority" mentioned in those statutes really means, whether it means the London borough or the Greater London Council. This Amendment picks out those other Statutes in which such references are made and defines the planning authority to which reference must be taken to be made when the Bill becomes law.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonIt will be noticed that subsection (8,a) refers to
Schedule 1 to the Pipe-lines Act, 1962.There are considerable provisions affecting the powers of local authorities whereby those laying pipelines can, in certain circumstances, take up and repair roads. We had no discussion on the provisions relating to pipelines.It ought to be on record that this House cannot find time to debate matters which may be of the utmost importance to local authorities and ratepayers. Nobody knows what powers can be exercised under the Pipe-lines Act, and I can see the prospect of considerable litigation. A protest should be made at the way in which the local authorities are being treated in this respect.
§ Question put and agreed to.