HL Deb 06 July 1992 vol 538 cc998-1000

3.50 p.m.

Viscount Goschen rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 15th June be approved [2nd Report from the Joint Committed.]

The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I understand that it will be convenient to consider at the same time the corresponding Scottish regulations. These regulations, which were considered in another place on 1st July, introduce planning application fees payable to local planning authorities by would-be developers, or owners or occupiers of land, in three different situations in England and Wales, and two different situations in Scotland.

The principle of charging is firmly established. The general level of fees will come before your Lordships later in the year when we next propose a general increase in fees. These regulations deal only with the fees payable for certain specific purposes. First, we are concerned to implement the remaining enforcement provisions of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991. Draft regulations 3 and 4 deal with the fee we propose should accompany an application for the new certificate of lawful use or development which will replace the present "established use" certificate system on 27th July in England and Wales and on 25th September in Scotland. These regulations will enable planning authorities to charge a fee for the new service from those dates.

The new certification system will enable anyone wishing to do so to obtain from the local planning authority a decision whether an application is required for a proposed use or development or whether an existing use or development is lawful. The certificate will provide evidence that the land is immune from enforcement action and it will mean that what is specified in it is lawful. It will therefore be a more valuable document than is now available. So we see no reason why a charge should not be made as a contribution towards the planning authority's administrative cost of considering an application. It is consistent with the Government's policy on charging.

The fees tariff aims to strike a balance between offsetting some of the administrative cost of providing the service and not deterring people from applying. We shall be proposing increases from time to time as we move towards enabling authorities to recover their full costs of processing and deciding applications. Meantime, the fees will continue to correspond with those charged for ordinary planning applications.

There is a concessionary fee proposed when an application concerns a proposed use or development. The fee will then be half of an equivalent planning application fee. The concession recognises that there is now no fee for the system such applications replace, namely Section 64 of the 1990 Act, or in Scotland, Section 51 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1972.

I turn now to regulations 5 and 7 of the draft English and Welsh regulations. If farmers intend to rely on the permitted development rights in the general development order, covering agricultural excavations and waste deposits, and floating fish tanks in inland waters, they will have to ask if the planning authority require to approve the details of it. The fee we propose for this service is £20, which matches that set for farm buildings and roads introduced last November.

Regulation 4(2) (b) of the draft Scottish regulations introduces for Scotland a fee of £20 from 25th August. This will cover the erection, or significant extension or alteration of, a farm or forestry building. The system is similar to that in effect in England and Wales.

I now turn to the matter of demolition. Section 13 of the 1991 Act brings the demolition of buildings within planning control for the first time. From 27th July the effect of a direction by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State, and amendments to the general development order, is that anyone who seeks the speculative demolition of a dwellinghouse, or a building adjoining a dwellinghouse, will have to ask the planning authority whether its prior approval is necessary. Regulation 5 provides that a fee of £20 will be payable for that service. In Scotland similar proposals are still being considered. Proposals for Scotland will be brought forward later this year.

These regulations implement the principle that those who benefit from local authority planning services should contribute to their administrative costs. It is now accepted as a fair principle. I commend the regulations to your Lordships. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 15th June be approved. [2nd Report from the Joint Committee.]—(Viscount Goschen.)

3.55 p.m.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, perhaps I may ask my noble friend to clear up a number of points arising from his interesting account of the regulations. First, can he confirm the impression which he created in my mind that these fees will go entirely to the local authorities and that they will not be taken over by central government? Secondly, can he say what is the total expected yield of the fees? What is the likely expected yield when the amendments which my noble friend forecasts are put into effect? Finally, as regards the regulation to which my noble friend referred last, am I right in understanding that when someone owns a house which is in a wholly decrepit condition—falling down, if you like—that person still has to make an application for planning permission to demolish the house and also pay for that planning permission? If so, can my noble friend indicate why someone who conscientiously decides to demolish a house rather than let it fall down should have to get that planning permission and pay for it?

Viscount Goschen

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his questions. I can confirm that the revenue from these planning procedures goes to the planning authority. The level of revenue will depend on the level of applications. As the system is new it is difficult to predict what that will be. We shall review the operation of the system as we review the existing planning application fee system. As regards the specific case which my noble friend raised concerning the conscientious householder who proceeds to demolish his house, I shall write to him.

On Question, Motion agreed to.