Speeches by Young.

“The Minister has admitted that not all schools will be fully funded, but blames that on the choices that schools have made about their staff. Does she accept that schools cannot fully control the profile of their staff, and that in some cases—I make this point in a letter to the Minister—schools choose to pay people in…”

“Businesses in Thornbury and Yate are crying out for change on business rates, from the Play Shed, which has seen its relief cut from 75% to 40%, to the company told it would have to wait at least a year to get a revaluation after it subdivided some units. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the Government bring to…”

“I do. We also need solutions for people like my constituent in the meantime; they have already had to pay £1,400 for treatment and they face another £2,000-worth of work to be able to eat normally. That is a stiff fee when you are reliant on personal independence payment and your spouse’s pension. My constituent feels …”

“Eleri and Chandni, did you have anything on that note?”

“How would you respond to an explicit requirement for renewable developers to reinstate any negatively affected farmland to a good agricultural condition?”

“I was thinking about national food security. That is not just about the individual farmer, their business and what is best for their own business. It is about protecting the best farmland in order to continue food production.”

“Yes. You could have an explicit requirement for renewable developers to reinstate.”

“You are essentially saying an explicit requirement is redundant because in practice, for business reasons or whatever, that is what already happens.”

“Could there be more emphasis on combining renewables with other uses? Could the national policy statements be more explicit in encouraging that?”

“Charles, is this something that the national policy statements need to make more explicit?”

“A stated aim of the amendments to planning policy for critical national priority infrastructure is to ensure that the national importance of those projects is considered, while encouraging higher quality applications. Do you think the amendments could encourage higher quality applications, despite the presumption of co…”

“Sam, the Government believe that the updates will discourage repeated consultation and drive environmental statements to be “proportionate and focused”. Will that prevent delays to critical national priority projects?”

“Jackie, do you want to come in on that point?”

“I am conscious of the time so will move on. Isobel, the presumption of consent for critical national priority infrastructure has been criticised for removing the incentive to avoid ecologically sensitive sites. Is that a necessary consequence of the policy achieving its objective, or could any improvements be made?”

“Jackie, do you support the new policy whereby measures to mitigate the environmental impacts that cause a “material reduction” in the electricity generation capacity of renewables are unlikely to be appropriate?”

“The policy says that if measures to mitigate the environmental impacts cause a material reduction, they are not likely to be appropriate.”

“Sam, should the policy be reframed to allow more flexibility and to clarify when maximising generation or achieving specific conservation objectives will take precedence?”

“Isobel, beyond simply mitigating environmental impacts, should the NPSs focus more on using strategic planning to integrate conservation into the design and construction of new energy infrastructure?”

“As you know, the Government are using the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to remove statutory pre-application consultation requirements. To implement that effectively, what further guidance do you want to see in the national policy statements?”

“We have just been talking about the presumption of consent for critical national infrastructure. How do you think that new policy will interact with that? Do you think that the NPSs need to set out a strong expectation that consultation is still expected? That then leaves the question, why remove the requirement in the…”