Speeches by Pennycook.

“I will give way in one second, if the hon. Member will allow me, because I think this is some useful context for some of the discussions that have taken place over recent months. The Government are grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) and the relevant Select Committe…”

“Let me be clear. I appreciate the concerns that hon. Members have expressed. I hope that I can provide some reassurance, but I am more than happy to have further exchanges on this point, which is an important one. The clause introduces a new streamlined procedure for making material policy amendments to national policy…”

“May I correct the hon. Gentleman? Local people in any part of the country affected by a development consent order will still be able to have their say on it. Nothing in the clause affects that arrangement.”

“The hon. Gentleman makes a reasonable point but, if I have understood him, it is a slightly different issue from the one we are considering. I will give him some extra clarity about the land use framework and any other material consideration that would need to be assessed. When looking at a national policy statement, t…”

“In the interest of focusing the debate on the actual changes that we are making in the clause, when a national policy statement has been reviewed and is to be updated, and involves material changes, all the assessments and consultation that need to take place, including laying the NPS before the House of Commons, will …”

“I thank the shadow Minister for his question, and I look forward to what I know will be constructive debates over the days and weeks to come. He makes a fair point, which I am just coming to, in relation to the clause also providing for the ability to delay a mandatory update when there are exceptional circumstances th…”

“I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley, for his constructive tone on this clause—and others; I do not mean to confine his constructive attitude to just this clause. I welcome his praise for Lord Banner’s review, which I agree was thoughtful and insightful. As part of that review Lord Banner made…”

“I am slightly taken aback by the supportive comment from the hon. Gentleman, but I very much welcome it. Before I make my main point, it may be helpful if I give hon. Members another example of the types of alternative consenting routes that may be considered more appropriate. We spoke about the Town and Country Planni…”

“I thank the hon. Gentleman for that entirely reasonable question. It would certainly be our intention, in preparing and publishing policy, to provide clarity. As I said on the Secretary of State’s considerations when determining requests for redirection of a project, we would hope that guidance absolutely provides cert…”

“Q Thank you all for coming to give evidence. This is a question for Richard, but I am sure the other two witnesses have views, assuming that you share some of the concerns that have just been outlined. Richard, you will know that we do not accept that development has to come at the expense of nature. We are very much t…”

“Q I want to be really clear, because this is important, given what we are asking Natural England to do. Without causing any tension between you and Marian Spain, do you disagree that, as she put it, “the Bill effectively maintains the mitigation hierarchy”? Richard Benwell: Yes, certainly at the project level. There is…”

“That is a very clear elaboration. On the Natural England point—on the mitigation hierarchy? Richard Benwell: As it stands, before a development that would have adverse effects on a protected site can go ahead, it is necessary, first, to try to avoid those harms, then to reduce those harms and only then, once all those …”

“Q Is there anything we are missing, broadly on speeding up and making more certain the NSIP process? Catherine Howard: Perhaps some guidance to the Planning Inspectorate about how to run the examinations with slightly more focus than we have seen. There has been a drift towards more questions and more rabbit holes, and…”

“Q Thank you, Catherine, for giving up your time this afternoon. I have two questions on the NSIP regime and development consent orders, which is your specialism. First, you will have seen that the Government tabled a series of amendments yesterday to remove the statutory requirement to consult as part of the pre-applic…”

“I take the point about the nuance. That is helpful—thank you.”

“Q Should every small site application come before a committee? Councillor Hug: No. We had a thing where someone in a public report was saying we had only built x number of houses, but the reality was that far more homes had gone through under delegated authority than had actually gone to committee, so we were being wro…”

“Q If I have understood you, I do not think we are suggesting that. We want the most important, most significant major applications to come to committee. Given the examples we have given before, should every reserved matters application come before a committee? Councillor Clewer: No.”

“Q I should say that we are formally consulting about this matter alongside the Bill, but it is useful to draw out what you think in design terms. Councillor Clewer: I have a couple of points to add. There are elements in what you are proposing that I would welcome. On mandatory training, goodness knows why we do not ha…”

“Q The Bill will mandate it, so I am asking you what you think is the most effective design for the national scheme of delegation that we intend to introduce. It is perfectly fine if you do not want it, but I am trying to get to that, given that we are intending to introduce it. Councillor Hug: I think there should be a…”

“Q We heard earlier from the RTPI about the variation in the quality and effectiveness of schemes of delegation at a local level. Councillor Wright: With regard to a national scheme, if it was advisory not mandatory—if there was some general advice out there that could be given as guidance —that would be better than man…”