COMMONS AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 29 March 1977)

§ Lord KIRKHILL

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 4 and 5. I should like also to link in Amendment No. 12 as I speak to these Amendments. These Amendments were moved by the Government at Report stage in another place after discussion in 804 Committee on an Opposition Amendment to delete Clause 4(2)(c). This paragraph introduced a 12 months' time limit from the commencement of an activity after which a stop notice could not be served, provided that the activity had been substantially continuous throughout that period. My honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State undertook at Committee stage to look again at this provision. The Government decided on balance that the 12 months' restriction should be removed, and Amendments were moved accordingly.

The limitation on the use of stop notices was originally included in the Bill because it was felt that it would be unfair for a planning authority to use a drastic power of this kind suddenly to prohibit a longstanding and continuous activity which it was previously prepared to tolerate. Against this, it was argued that planning authorities must be trusted to act responsibly in deciding what enforcement action to take in a particular case.

Members of the Opposition in another place raised the question of the problem of intensification of an activity. What happens if an activity has begun in a small way and is then intensified to the point where the planning authority decides that enforcement action is necessary? In principle, the Bill provides for this by enabling the planning authority to apply a stop notice to part of any activity alleged in the enforcement notice to be in breach of planning control. However, the Government appreciate that there is considerable scope here for argument about what the level of an activity was on any particular date, and that there might thus be difficulties in applying a stop notice in these circumstances.

In addition, the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, made the point in Committee that it might sometimes be difficult to prove whether or not a particular use had been carried on for more than a year. There is also the difficulty of someone who successfully conceals his unauthorised activity from the planning authority for 12 months and thereby escapes a stop notice. Though such cases might rarely give rise to serious consequences, this is an additional point which the Government have considered.

All in all, while we acknowledge that there may be an element of rough justice about 805 this, the Government believe that we will have a simpler and more useful Statute as a result of removing the 12 months' limitation.