§ 7.15 p.m.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI beg to move Amendment No. 102, in page 76, line 29, at beginning insert 'an operative'.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we may take Government Amendments Nos. 102 and 104.
We may take Amendment No. 106, in page 77, line 29, at end insert:
'Provided always that the Board shall if so requested in a notice given under paragraph 36(1) of Schedule 8 certify the development and the land comprised in a project of material development by virtue of this paragraph'.We may also take Government Amendments Nos. 107, 108, 114 to 120, 194 and 195.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI hope that the House will discuss this amendment and all the amendments that are grouped with it, together with the consequential amendments and the amendments to Schedule 8, that is Amendments Nos. 194 and 195.
§ Mr. Graham PageWe find that these amendments are acceptable. However we are not certain whether they cover the amendments standing in the names of my right hon. and hon. and learned Friends—that is, Amendments Nos. 106 and 121.
If it is the wish of the House, perhaps the Minister will confirm that those amendments are included or are covered fairly well by his own amendments. That will save the time of the House.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI think that I may give the right hon. Gentleman the assurance that we substantially cover the points that were raised in Committee. The argument centred on more than one notice being received by the Inland Revenue on the commencement of development or project development.
The right hon. Gentleman raised the point that the Revenue should take the first notice. The amendments to Schedule 8 meet his point at least three-quarters of the way, as they provide for the concept of an operational notice if there is a conflict and we receive a number of notices. Where there is no conflict between notices, we do not meet his point. Where there is a conflict between the notices we meet the point which the right hon. Gentleman raised in Committee. There is an appeals procedure. We have gone substantially the whole way to meet his points. If there is a conflict between the notices we shall not take the first notice. The matter may be resolved first by the Inland Revenue and then on appeal. I hope that that is sufficient to show him that we have gone a long way to meet his points.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI beg to move Amendment No. 103, in page 76, line 32, leave out from 'then' to end of line 40 and insert:
'for the purposes of this Act the project shall be taken to be begun on the specified starting date unless—and accordingly in any case falling within paragraphs (a) to (c) above, the date on which for the purposes of this Act the project is to be taken to be begun shall be determined without regard to the date specified in the notice under paragraph 36(1) of Schedule 8 below.'
- (a) the Board are informed by or on behalf of the person by whom the notice was given that the project was not in fact started, or will not be started, on the specified starting date, or
- (b) the Board notify that person that they consider that the specified starting date is materially different from the date on which the project would be taken to be begun having regard to sub-paragraphs (1) and (2) above, or
1898 - (c) notice is given by the Board under paragraph 6(5) below with respect to the, whole or any part of the material development specified in the notice of the project,
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we may take Amendment (a), in line 15, at end add
'subject to any decision by the Special Commissioners upon an appeal to them to review a decision by the Board under this sub-paragraph.'
§ Mr. Graham PageI should like to intervene at this point, if I may. Amendment No. 103 is satisfactory to the Opposition provided that it covers Amendment (a). I think that the Minister may be able to confirm that it provides the appeal for which we ask in Amendment (a).
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI give that assurance, although the amendment is slightly different. The right hon. Gentleman asked for a special appeals procedure. The appeal is there. There will be an appeal to a special commissioner.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendment made:
§
No. 104, in page 76, line 40, at end insert—
'(4) Notwithstanding anything in sub-paragraph (1) above, where, in relation to a project of material development, the Board determine the date on which the project should be taken to be begun and serve notice of their determination under paragraph 36(3B) of Schedule 8 below, the project shall be taken for the purposes of this Act to be begun on that date'—[Mr. Denzil Davies.]
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI beg to move Amendment No. 105, in page 77, line 15, leave out from "and" to end of line 16 and insert
that project shall be taken to be begun at the end of the period specified in the planning permission referred to in paragraph (a) above".The effect of the amendment is to defer the liability to development land tax when a limited planning permission is extended. Paragraph 3 of Schedule 1 provides that where a project has been carried out under a limited permission and the permission is extended, a new project is deemed to have been commenced. As the Bill stands, this new project is taken 1899 to have commenced on the date the permission was extended or when a fresh planning permission for a further period was given. The amendment will defer the date of the start of the assumed new project until the expiry date of the current limited permission.This is a relieving amendment. It defers payment of the tax until the expiry date, a point made by the right hon. Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) on Second Reading and probably in Committee too.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendments made: No. 107; page 77, leave out lines 32 to 42 and insert—
(a) notice relating to a project of material development has been given under paragraph 36 of Schedule 8 below and
(b) that notice was either—
then, for the purposes of this Act, no development which does not fall within the nature and scope of the project as specified in the notice referred to in paragraph (a) above shall be taken to be development comprised in the project; and no land which does not form part of the land specified in that notice shall be taken to be land comprised in the project".
§
No. 108, in page 77, line 45, leave out from "where" to "and" in line 46 and insert
in relation to a project of material development, an operative notice has been given under sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 36 of schedule 8 below, or a notice has been given by the Board under sub-paragraph (3B) of that paragraph".—[Mr. Denzil Davies.]
§ Mr. Graham PageI beg to move Amendment No. 109 in page 78, line 28, at end insert
(7) In the case of development comprising a material change of use of a building and alteration or improvement works to be carried out for the purpose of that change of use the change of use together with the alteration and improvement works shall be taken to comprise a single project of material development.This amendment is self-explanatory. It seeks to make certain that, where there is development which comprises a 1900 material change of use of a building, with alteration or improvement works to be carried out for the purpose of that change of use, the change of use with the alteration and improvement works are taken as a single project of material development. It seems that this is one transaction it should not be treated as a number of separate transactions which could give rise to the elaborate procedure of valuation for the purposes of development land tax that must occur on a material development and therefore a deemed disposal.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesThis amendment might produce a certain inflexibility as regards the treatment of projects. I accept what the right hon. Gentleman has said, however, that there may be some cases where the amendment would be of assistance. In view of that, I am prepared to recommend that it should be accepted.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. Ian StewartI beg to move Amendment No. 110, in page 78, line 32, after 'development', insert 'other than landscaping'.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we may take Amendment No. 113, in line 42 at end insert 'or (c) was landscaping'.
§ Mr. StewartI hope that the virtues of this amendment are self-evident.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesThe hon. Member has moved the amendment briefly. Most Opposition amendments have certain virtues. We have tried to meet the point of this amendment in the circular which the Department of the Environment sent out to local authorities, specifically mentioning landscaping as one of the blocking reservations which might be placed on a planning permission. I do not believe it is necessary to incorporate this amendment in the Bill.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerI am not quite sure whether that reply is good enough from my point of view. Why must we have these circulars? Why not put it in the Bill? There is too much government by circular, certainly with this legislation. If the Minister accepts the principle why cannot he accept the amendment?
§ Amendment negatived.
1901§ Mr. Graham PageI beg to move Amendment No. 111, in page 78, line 41, leave out sub-paragraph (b) and insert—
'(b) was not so authorised but had either been approved in the manner applicable to that planning permission or was approved after the appointed day pursuant to application for approval of reserved matters submitted before the appointed day'.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we may take Amendment No. 112 in line 42 at end insert
'or might reasonably (on the appointed day) have been expected to have been approved in that manner not being development for which, on the date of disposal, approval has been refused in that manner'.
§ Mr. PageThis is a matter of considerable substance. We are trying to amend a paragraph which says that, in determining for the purposes of an earlier paragraph what material development of any land was authorised by planning permission in force on the appointed day—and that is an important matter to decide—only such development of the land as on that day
was not so authorised but had been approved in the manner applicable to that planning permissionshall be taken to have been authorised.Amendment No. 111 would remove those words and insert the rather broader definition.
Amendment No. 112 stands as an alternative or an addition. As the clause stands it is a hit and miss affair whether a person has the planning permission at the right moment. It can never be judged when a planning permission is to be granted. It may be a short period or it may drag on for a long time, being considered by the planning authority, and may eventually be granted exactly as the application required, or very near to it. If a planning permission is so granted in accordance with these amendments it seemed that the definition of material development should be adjusted.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesOur debate in Committee highlighted some of the difficulties of trying to frame suitable legislation to cover this point. We are here concerned with reservations on matters in planning permissions before the appointed day. These could be major or minor reservations. It would be impossible—and the amendment does not seek to do this—to draw any distinction between 1902 major and minor reservations which might be allowed later.
The only fair way is the way in which the Bill operates, namely that, subject to the exception about appeal to the Minister and another exception, if there is planning permission on the appointed day one consequence follows and if there is not another consequence follows. Once we start having to decide which reservations are all right and which are not we get into considerable difficulty.
I mentioned earlier the circular from the Department of the Environment and the hon. Member for Hitchin (Mr. Stewart) said that this was government by circular. Perhaps I did not explain the purpose of that circular. It has been well publicised, especially in professional journals. The circular told local authorities to get a move on and to unblock reservations before the appointed day—before the tax came into operation. The circular was meant to help the taxpayer, to help developers, and to push local authorities into granting planning permission so that developers would not be faced with a tax on many reservations. This is not government by circular. It does not impose any legal obligation. It seeks to assist developers in the operation of planning matters.
§ 7.30 p.m.
§ This is as far as we can go, because it is important to frame the legislation to cover all the different reservations—some large, some small, some genuine and some not so genuine. For these reasons, I cannot accept these two amendments.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Amendments made: No. 114, in page 79, line 8, after 'receives', insert 'an operative'.
§
No. 115, in line 23, at end insert:
'(2A) In any case where—
the provisions of this Act, other than this paragraph, shall have effect as if the development to which the direction relates were comprised in a separate project of material development'.—[Mr. Denzil Davies.]
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith the agreement of the House, perhaps I can ask the Minister to move formally Government Amendments Nos. 116 to 120 inclusive.
§ Amendments made: No. 116, in page 79, line 26, leave out 'notice' and insert 'direction'.
§ No. 117, in line 27, after '(2)', insert 'or (2A)'.
§ No. 118, in line 40, after 'begun insert an operative'.
§
No. 119, in page 80, leave out lines 9 and 10 and insert—
'(5A) In any case where—
the Board may, by the subsequent notice referred to in paragraph (a) above, direct that the whole or such part as may be specified in the notice of the material development to which that notice relates forms part of the original project.(6) Where a direction is given by the Board under sub-paragraph (5) or sub-paragraph (5A) above, the material development to which the direction relates'.
§
No. 120, in line 14, at end insert—
'(7) On an appeal against an assessment to development land tax, the Special Commissioners shall have jurisdiction to review any decision taken by the Board under subparagraph (2)(b), sub-paragraph (2A(b), subparagraph (5)(c) or sub-paragraph (5A)(c) above'.—[Mr. Denzil Davies.]
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesI beg to move Amendment No. 122, in page 81, line 27, at end insert—
'9A.—(1) The provisions of this paragraph apply where, by virtue of the beginning of a project of material development,—
- (a) there is a deemed disposal of a major interest which is an interest falling within paragraph 8(2) above (in this paragraph referred to as "the incumbrance"); and
- (b) there is a deemed disposal of another major interest on which the chargeable person is treated, by virtue of paragraph 9(1) above, as having assumed a contingent liability in respect of the incumbrance.
(2) Where realised development value accrues to the holder of the incumbrance on the deemed disposal referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(a) above, liability for development land tax on that realised development value shall be deferred until the occasion of the first subsequent disposal of the incumbrance which is not a deemed disposal.(3) In its application to a liability for development land tax which is deferred by virtue of this paragraph, section 27 of this Act shall have effect with the omission of subsections (4) to (6) and, in subsection (3), of the words "Subject to subsection (4) below"'.This amendment, again, fulfils an undertaking given in Committee. This is a very difficult and complex area, but the point was drawn to my attention that there might be double taxation here. As I promised in Committee, I have considered this again and the amendment removes any possibility of double taxation in relation to incumbrances.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendment made: No. 123, in page 82, line 5 leave out '50' and insert 'thirty-five'.—[Mr. Denzil Davies.]