AMENDMENTS RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT OF CONTROL (Hansard, 15 May 1981)

§ Mr. Hastings
I beg to move, amendment No. 2, in page 3, line 38, leave out `which consist of the carrying out of work.':

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we may discuss amendment No. 3, in page 4, line 31, leave out `consisting of the carrying out of work'.

§ Mr. Hastings
These are drafting amendments designed to make it clear that steps which a local planning authority may require, under section 88(10)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 for the purpose of removing or alleviating any injury to amenity which has been caused by the development, are not confined only to steps consisting of the carrying-out of work. The purpose is to give the local planning authorities greater flexibility in requiring the appropriate steps to be taken to remedy a breach of planning control.

§ Mr. John Heddle (Lichfield and Tamworth)
I beg to move amendment No. 4, in page 9, line 7, at end insert— `(a) in subsection (4) for the word "three" there shall be substituted the words "the day following"; and '. The purpose is to amemd the existing provisions for stop notices in section 90(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 so that a stop notice served by a local authority can take effect on the day after the day on which it is served instead of not earlier than three days from the date of service.
The existing provisions for stop notices to be served by a planning authority to bring a breach of planning control to a halt immediately are sometimes considered to be drastic. At present, any one who receives a stop notice can 1073 be required to stop what he is doing at three days notice. A person might abuse the stop notice. Some planning authorities have found that in certain circumstances three days is too long. They need to act quickly particularly when mineral extraction is involved.

§ Mr. Giles Shaw
I understand the reasons for the amendment. It would be wrong to make the existing provisions even more drastic. I suggest that the Department should examine how frequently the present provisions are found to be inadequate and to consult the industries involved about possible disadvantages of such a strict provision. If the amendment is withdrawn, time for consultation would be provided. If it is appropriate, a suitably-agreed amendment could be tabled in another place.

§ Mr. Heddle
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

§ Mr. Hastings
I beg to move amendment No. 5, in page 9, line 28, after 'authority', insert `and every council of a London borough'.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we may discuss the following amendments: No. 6, in page 9, leave out line 46.
No. 7, in page 10, line 5, at end add 'and (c) for requiring the Greater London Council to supply to the council of a London borough such information as may be so specified with regard to enforcement notices issued and stop notices served by the Greater London Council.'.

§ Mr. Hastings
These are drafting amendments to remedy an omission in the new section 92A(1) inserted in the 1971 Act by paragraph 6 of the schedule, which requires every district planning authority in England and Wales to keep a register of enforcement and stop notices.
The new section 92A omits to provide for the register to be kept by local planning authorities in the Greater London area where each London borough is the appropriate authority. The amendments include every council of a London borough with district planning authorities elsewhere in the new requirement to keep a register of the notices.

§ Mr. Heddle
I beg to move amendment No. 8, in page 15, line 5, at end insert—