I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that you have not missed the point. Unless I am very much mistaken, in other parts of the country a parish council comes with a parish precept. Therefore, if a parish council is being proposed, surely, unless London is being treated differently, a precept would follow. I do not call that scaremongering. The Chancellor seems to be the only person who still believes that the streets of London are paved with gold.
The Queen’s Speech also contains provisions for planning reform. Despite only two years having passed since the Government’s last attempt at planning reform, we still have the worst of all worlds—a centralised planning system that pays little heed to the wishes of local government and, at the same time, delivers nothing like the number of houses needed. It was disingenuous of the Secretary of State to talk about giving more opportunity to people to own their own home at a time when the prospect of getting on the housing ladder is further and further away for a whole generation of young people. The reason for that is the top-down, centrally imposed planning system created by the Chancellor and Deputy Prime Minister.
As the House will appreciate, it is difficult to comment with certainty at this stage, as any planning legislation will be informed by the Treasury-commissioned Barker review, but we have several concerns. It is reported that the Treasury wants to amend the planning regulations so that controls on out-of-town shopping centres are weakened. Those regulations were originally put in place by my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) specifically to address the risk of high streets and urban communities becoming ghost towns. We are committed to retaining that protection so that truly sustainable communities, both economically and environmentally, can be delivered. The Opposition have made a firm pledge by signing up to the new sustainable communities Bill in conjunction with the pressure group Local Works. The test for the Government, however, will be whether the Department for Communities and Local Government will capitulate to the Treasury and remove that planning protection.
The Government have also made clear their determination to push ahead with a new land development tax. We have long campaigned for infrastructure to match development, but, so far, that campaign has fallen on deaf ears, leaving communities with insufficient doctors, dentists, school places and transport links. Let us take the example of Milton Keynes. The people of Milton Keynes are right when they call for more infrastructure before expansion. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Milton Keynes (Mr. Lancaster) on his I before E—infrastructure before expansion—campaign. That campaign is more justified than ever now that Virgin Trains has cut its commuter services to and from Milton Keynes.
The Government have treated infrastructure as an afterthought, much as they regard the environment. That is not just my opinion—I am paraphrasing what the Environmental Audit Committee said in its report in the first Session last year:"““We remain deeply concerned that ODPM is determined to build new homes first and then worry later””."
The report also refers to the Government"““sweeping aside any concerns that people may have about the environmental impact of housing plans””."
The Government see land development tax as the solution to infrastructure needs. But, if you will forgive me for being sceptical, Mr. Speaker, it will be collected centrally, and there is no guarantee that it will get back down to the local community to provide what is needed. Instead, there is every chance that it will be swallowed up in the Chancellor’s economic black hole. There is also a real danger that it will serve as a deterrent to regeneration of areas that need regeneration desperately. Ultimately, it will add to the cost of buying a new home at a time when first-time buyers are already despairing of their chances of ever being able to buy their own homes.
Communities and Local Government/Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Proceeding contribution from
Caroline Spelman
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 20 November 2006.
It occurred during Queen's speech debate on Communities and Local Government/Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
453 c274-6 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:27:25 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_359668
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_359668
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_359668