HC Deb 22 May 1968 vol 765 cc792-803

CONTROL OF WORKS FOR DEMOLITION, ALTERATION OR EXTENSION OF LISTED BUILDINGS.

Amendment made: No. 246, in page 72, line 35, leave out ' section 33' and insert ' listed building'.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

Mr. MacDermot

I beg to move Amendment No. 165, in page 72, leave out lines 39 to 43.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this we can discuss Amendment No. 169.

Mr. MacDermot

These Amendments set out the procedure by which local planning authorities are required to notify the Minister of applications made to them for listed building consent, to assist the Minister in deciding whether to call in a consent. The provision in new paragraph (3) sets out the procedure for planning authorities outside Greater London and means that a copy will have to be sent to the Minister of any consent which they propose to grant. After notifying the Minister, the planning authority must not grant consent on the application until 28 days have passed from the date of notification, or the Minister has stated that he does not propose to intervene. The London Borough procedure repeats the current procedure in the relevant regulations.

Paragraph (5) enables the Minister to give directions exempting specific types of application from this notification procedure. He may not exempt application for consent to demolish listed buildings. The present intention is to issue a direction exempting from the notification procedure applications for works which would affect only the interiors of Grade II non-starred buildings. All others will be subject to the Minister's supervision. The power will be used to keep the amenity societies informed of applications.

Mr. Allason

I wonder whether the Minister could tell us what has happened to the other specified persons in Paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 3 who have been taken out in lines 39 to 43. There was a requirement to notify specified persons who were—

Mr. MacDermot

My last comment was meant to cover them. Paragraph 5(2) re-enacts the original paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 3.

Mr. Allason

I had got that. I was about to say that it occurred there. It is not clear which notification is which. There is a requirement to notify under the new paragraph 3(1) and there is also a requirement to notify under paragraph 5. It all depends on what is specified, but it is a little confusing, if the Minister has 28 days to consider whether he wants to call something in, why there should be a separate requirement to notify the Minister. Is it a different form which has to be filled in or is it different parts?

Paragraph 5(2) says that the Minister may call in the application for consent. It really is a question of how he is notified. Is he notified under paragraph 3(1)(a) or is it a case where he has had informal discussions and decides to call the matter in?

I would be grateful if the Minister could tell us what is the intention of the change. By "change" I mean the effect of this Amendment from what was in the Bill previously. Is it very much stricter control by the Minister and the G.L.C., or is it only a tightening up and putting in greater detail the arrangements which are intended, but that the general effect of what goes to the Minister will remain the same?

It is interesting to note that under this provision the G.L.C. can give absolute instructions to boroughs, which is liable to put them to considerable expense, and, of course, in turn the Minister can do the same thing to local authorities.

Mr. MacDermot

There is no change for London. We have merely re-enacted the existing provisions. The first main change in paragraph 5 is that we are writing specifically into the Bill that there is no power of exemption for applications for consent to demolish listed buildings. These have to be notified to the Minister.

The second main change is that we are limiting the notification to the Minister of those cases in which the authorities are proposing to grant consent. This will save paper work at the Ministry. Those are all that we need to consider for the purpose of call-in. Otherwise, we will be able to exempt certain classes, but I have indicated the only class which at present we are proposing to make the subject of an exemption.

Paragraph 5(2) is a separate matter. This is to keep alive the power which will enable amenity societies to be informed of the applications.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment made: No. 166, in page 72, line 44, leave out ' section 33' and insert ' listed building '.— [Mr. MacDermot.]

5.15 a.m.

Mr. MacDermot

I beg to move Amendment No. 167, in page 72, line 46, at end insert: 2.—(1) Regulations under this Act may provide that an application for listed building consent shall not be entertained unless it is accompanied by one or other of the certificates described in paragraphs (a) to (d) of section 16(1) of the principal Act (requirement of certificate that applicant for planning permission is the owner of the land or has given notice to the owners of his intended application, or has tried to do so) and may make with respect to such certificates provision corresponding to subsections (2) to (4), (6) and (7) of that section. (2) If any person issues a certificate which purports to comply with the requirements of regulations made by virtue of this paragraph and which contains a statement which he knows to be false or misleading in a material particular, or recklessly issues a certificate which purports to comply with those requirements and which contains a statement which is false or misleading in a material particular, he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £100. This is to enable the Minister to make Regulations about the provision of certificates to applications for listed building consent analogous to those in Section 16 of the 1962 Act in relation to planning permissions. It is to ensure that an application for such consent is not made by a person with no interest in the building without the knowledge of the owner or the tenant.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: No. 168, in page 73, line 2, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 169, in page 73, line 14, at end insert:

3.—(1) Subject to the following provisions, a local planning authority (other than a London borough council) to whom application is made for listed building consent shall not grant such consent, unless they have notified the Minister of the application (giving particulars of the works for which the consent is required) and either—

  1. (a) a period of twenty-eight days has expired, beginning with the date of the notification, without the Minister having directed the reference of the application to him; or
  2. (b) the Minister has notified the authority that he does not intend to require the reference of the application.

(2) The Minister may at any time before the said period expires give notice to the authority that he requires further time in which to consider whether to require the reference of the application to him and the foregoing sub-paragraph shall then have effect with the substitution for a period of twenty-eight days or such longer period as may be specified in the Minister's notice.

4.—(1) Subject to the following provisions, where application for listed building consent is made to a local planning authority, being a London borough council, and the authority do not determine to refuse it, they shall notify the Greater London Council of the application (giving particulars of the works for which the consent is required) and shall not grant such consent unless authorised or directed to do so under the following sub-paragraph.

(2) On receipt of notification under sub-paragraph (1) above the Greater London Council may either—

  1. (a) authorise the local planning authority to grant or refuse the application as they think fit; or
  2. (b) give them directions as to how they are to determine it.

(3) The Greater London Council shall not authorise the local planning authority as mentioned in sub-paragraph (2)(a) above, nor under sub-paragraph (2)(b) above direct them to grant listed building consent, unless the Council have notified the Minister of the application made to the local planning authority (giving particulars of the works for which the consent is required) and either—

  1. (a)a period of twenty-eight days has expired, beginning with the date of the notification, without the Minister having directed the reference of the application to him; or
  2. (b) the Minister has notified the Council that he does not intend to require the reference of the application.

(4) The Minister may at any time before the said period of twenty-eight days expires give notice to the Council that he requires further time in which to consider whether to require the reference of the application to him and the foregoing sub-paragraph shall then have effect with the substitution for the period of twenty-eight days of such longer period as may be specified in the Minister's notice.

5.—(1) The Minister may give directions that, in the case of such descriptions of application for listed building consent as he may specify, other than such consent for the demolition of a building, paragraphs 3 and 4 above shall not apply; and accordingly, so long as the directions are in force local planning authorities may determine applications of such descriptions in any manner they think fit, without notifying the Minister or, as the case may be, the Greater London Council.

(2) Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions of this Schedule, the Minister may give directions to local planning authorities requiring them, in such cases or classes of case as may be specified in the directions, to notify to him and to such other persons as may be so specified any applications made to them for listed building consent, and the decisions taken by the authorities thereon.

No. 170, in line 16 leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 171, in line 45 leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 172, in page 74, line 9, leave out 'section 33 ' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 247, in line 17 leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 173, in line 39 leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 174, in page 75, line 9, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 175, in line 26 leave out ' section 33 ' and insert ' listed building'.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

Mr. MacDermot

I beg to move Amendment No. 176, in page 75, line 30, at end insert:

8.—(1) The following provisions shall have effect where the local planning authority have made an order under paragraph 5 of this Schedule but have not submitted the order to the Minister for confirmation by him, and—

  1. (a)the owner and occupier of the land and all persons who in the authority's opinion will be affected by the order have notified the authority in writing that they do not object to the order; and
  2. (b)it appears to the authority that no claim for compensation is likely to arise under paragraph 7 above.

(2) The authority shall advertise in the prescribed manner the fact that the order has been made, and the advertisement shall specify—

  1. (a)the period (not less than twenty-eight days from the date on which the advertisement first appears) within which persons affected by the order may give notice to the Minister that they wish for an opportunity of appearing before, and being heard by, a person appointed by the Minister for the purpose; and
  2. (b)the period (not less than fourteen days from the expiration of the period referred to in paragraph (a) above) at the expiration of which, if no such notice is given to the Minister, the order may take effect by virtue of this paragraph and without being confirmed by the Minister.

(3)The authority shall also serve notice to the same effect on the persons mentioned in sub-paragraph (1)(a) above, and the notice shall include a statement of the effect of sub-paragraph (7) below.

(5)The authority shall send a copy of any advertisement published under sub-paragraph (2) above to the Minister, not more than three days after the publication.

(6) If within the period referred to in sub-paragraph (2)(a) above no person claiming to be affected by the order has given notice to the Minister as aforesaid and the Minister has not directed that the order be submitted to him for confirmation, the order shall at the expiration of the period referred to in sub-paragraph (2)(b) above take effect by virtue of this paragraph and without being confirmed by the Minister as required by paragraph 5 of this Schedule.

(6)This paragraph does not apply to an order revoking or modifying a listed building consent granted by the Minister under Part V of this Act or under this Schedule.

(7) No compensation shall be payable under paragraph 7 of this Schedule in respect of an order under paragraph 5 thereof which takes effect by virtue of this paragraph and without being confirmed by the Minister.

Mr. Allason

This follows the wording of Clause 76, suitably modified. We speak here of compensation for listed building consent, but, under Clause 34(2), that can also be planning consent. If someone says that he does not want to claim for listed building consent, I think that this does not bar him from making a claim for revocation of planning consent, which he might well wish to make.

Mr. MacDermot

Listed building consent does not necessarily carry with it planning consent. This deals with the revocation of listed building consent and there are other provisions to deal with revocation of planning consent.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: No. 177, in page 75, line 33, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 178, in page 76, line 3, leave out ' section 35 ' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 179, in line 12, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 180, in line 25, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 181, in line 36, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.2

No. 182, in line 46, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

Mr. Allason

I beg to move Amendment No. 183, in page 76, line 46, after ' may ', insert ' subject to the agreement of the owner'.

The purchase notice is valid under Section 35(l)(a) of the principal Act if the land is useless in its existing state or under conditions attached to the consent or with all the other consents which have been given. Before the applicant can press his purchase notice, he must show that. Section 35(4) takes no account of prospective use involving new development or works requiring consent, save where the local planning authority or the Minister undertakes to grant consent.

This is very similar to the case we have already had, but I want to press it again because we did not get any success on the last occasion. The Minister may quash a purchase notice by directing that consent for other works can be granted. Suppose the owner does not agree to this. Surely the Government have not got the intention of forcing this upon an unwilling owner? I find it terribly hard to believe that they really are prepared to do this, that they will say to the owner of a house, "No. By carrying out certain works this property can be made viable" when the owner does not want to carry out the works, and has reasonable ground for resisting. I am sure that the owner's consent really ought to be obtained, and I trust that the Government will this time accept the Amendment.

Mr. MacDermot

I will see if I can persuade the hon. Gentleman. Quite a lot of heat was engendered last time we discussed this. What we are dealing with is the situation where the owner of a listed building is trying to get the local authority to purchase it, so it is not as though the wretched owner were being compelled to do works to the house he does not want to do or to retain a house he does not want. In order to get the local authority to buy it he has got to show that it is what my hon. Friend called a white elephant and that there is no reasonable prospect of its having beneficial use. It is surely a fair answer for the authority to say, "We are prepared to give a grant of planning permission for something which will make it of beneficial use." If he does not want that, and does not want to do it himself, the answer is, "Put it on the market." That is not a hardship, because he wants to sell it, anyway.

Mr. Allason

Yes, but this is quite unreasonable. If there is a cottage in the High Street, and it is a residential property, the Minister says, "If you put a shop front in that cottage and turn it into a tea shop you can make a packet out of it." The Minister nods his head. Those are precisely the circumstances which could apply here. This, I think, is utterly unreasonable. Why should somebody have to turn a cottage into a tea shop if he does not want to?

Mr. MacDermot

Sell it to somebody else with the benefit of permission to use it as a tea shop. I should think it very easy to sell.

Mr. Allason

The Minister nods his head. He does agree that this is the way the property has got to go. It may turn out profitable to sell it as a tea shop; it may turn out to be very unprofitable. I have known plenty of tea shops to go bust. Why should the local authority be able to avoid its responsibilities simply by this means? I think this is thoroughly unreasonable. The local authority is simply to pass off its responsibility to somebody else. If it is going to be so profitable to turn the house into a tea shop, why does not the local authority turn it into a tea shop and sell it and make a profit, instead of the owner?

Amendment negatived.

Further Amendments made: No. 184, in page 76, line 47, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'; No. 185, in page 77, line 1, leave out 'section 33' and insert ' listed building '.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

Mr. Skeffington

I beg to move Amendment No. 186, in page 77, line 2, at end insert: (5) If it appears to the Minister that the land, or any part of the land, could be rendered capable of reasonably beneficial use within a reasonable time by the carrying out of any development for which planning permission ought to be granted, he may, in lieu of confirming the listed building purchase notice, or in lieu of confirming it so far as it relates to that part of the land, as the case may be, direct that planning permission for that development shall be granted in the event of an application being made in that behalf. Paragraph (9) of the Schedule lays down the courses of action open to the Minister after a listed building purchase notice is transmitted to him. As the Bill stands, the Minister is not empowered to direct a grant of planning permission, as distinct from a listed building consent, when considering a listed building purchase notice. The Amendment would empower him to do so.

Mr. Allason:

Are we allowed, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to discuss the proposed Opposition Amendment to the Government Amendment; in line 3, after 'may', insert 'subject to the agreement of the owner' and, if so, are we also allowed to vote on it?

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Sydney Irving)

The hon. Member may discuss the Amendment to the Amendment, but it cannot be voted upon.

Mr. Allason

I regret that because I am astonished at the way in which the citizen is being treated these days. The arguments which I could adduce on this matter are the same as those my hon. Friends put forward in the last discussion, and I rise merely to record my protest at this state of affairs.

Mr. MacDermot

I answer that protest by saying that this has been a feature of purchase notice procedure since 1947 and was maintained during the tenure of office of the Conservative Party.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: No. 187, in page 77, line 16, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 188, in line 46, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 189, in page 78, line 2, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 190, in line 5, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 191, in line 8, leave out 'section 35' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 192, in line 12, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 193, in line 14, leave out 'section 35'.

No. 194, in line 19, leave out from 'A' to end of line and insert 'listed building enforcement notice'.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

No. 195, to leave out line 22.—[Mr. A llason.]

No. 196, in line 26, leave out from 'a' to 'shall' in line 27 and insert 'listed building enforcement notice'.

No. 197, in line 30, leave out from 'a' to 'at' in line 31 and insert 'listed building enforcement notice'.

No. 198, in line 34, leave out from 'a' to end of line and insert 'listed building enforcement notice'.

No. 199, in line 45, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 200, in page 79, line 3, leave out 'under section 37'.

No. 201, in line 36, leave out from 'the to 'or' in line 37 and insert 'listed building enforcement notice'.

No. 202, in line 29, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 203, in page 80, line 7, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.

No. 204, in line 11, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

No. 205, in line 24, leave out '41(2)' and insert '41(3)'.

No. 206, in line 32, leave out 'section 33' and insert 'listed building'.—[Mr. Skeffington.]

Mr. Graham Page

I beg to move Amendment No. 207, in page 80, line 33, leave out 'and with it' and insert 'but not'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I understood that this Amendment was considered with an earlier Amendment.

Mr. Page

I do not recollect it being discussed. If it was, then, in the words of the Amendment, I was "with it". In using the phrases "and with it" and "but not" the Amendment may sound nonsense, but it has a great deal of sense behind it. The provision of Part V to which the Amendment relates states: Any proceedings on or arising out of an application for section 33 consent made while the building preservation notice was in force shall lapse and with it any consent granted with respect to the building. I would read "any consent" as covering any planning permission or anything of that nature to do with the property. Why should planning consent lapse merely because a building preservation notice has failed? Under Clause 41 the building preservation notice, I understand, is a holding operation prior to the listing of the building as a listed building. If when the building preservation notice is removed it takes with it any other consents, it seems that just by putting up a building preservation notice and then removing it the local planning authority could rub out all planning permissions. I cannot think that that is the intention. Perhaps the Minister can explain the words, "and with it" a little better.

5.30 a.m.

Mr. MacDermot

I am not sure that the words "and with it" are grammatical because it is the proceedings that lapse and one could hardly refer to them as "it", but that is a matter which can be looked at.

The point made by the hon. Member is misconceived. The consent which lapses with the building preservation notice is the listed building consent. The error in his argument is that a listed building consent can operate as a planning permission. The converse is true —a planning permission can operate as a listed building consent. There is no question of withdrawing the benefit of a planning permission merely by allowing a listed building consent to lapse. The Amendment, therefore, is unnecessary.

Mr. Graham Page

If the Minister gives the assurance that that is the intention, I accept it, but it is certainly not what is said grammatically or ungrammatically in the Clause. It needs a small amendment in the wording. On his assurance that that will be done, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: No. 208, in page 80, line 35, leave out from 'Any' to 'served' and insert 'listed building enforcement notice'.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

Forward to