Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

I, too, want to refer to community involvement. Those words appear in the heading to Clause 69 but the clause provides that the statement is concerned with the involvement of persons who appear to the responsible regional authorities to have an interest in the exercise of the functions. That is not quite the same, even if one reads into it that there is a requirement that they behave reasonably. I am still not sure that the matter raised by my Amendment 176D is covered. Clause 70(4) provides for the position if the authorities decide to have an EiP and Clause 70(5) provides for the position if they decide not to have one. Deciding not to do something is also a decision. I am concerned about the two component parts failing to reach a decision, and that is what I wanted to see covered. There is certainly a debate to be had about whether one party would prevail over another concerning the rights and wrongs and where the balance of power should be. However, putting on one side what is perhaps a more philosophical argument, I think that there is still a lacuna here. Having said that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 176B withdrawn. Amendments 176C to 177 not moved. Clause 70 agreed. Clause 71 : Matters to be taken into account in revision Amendments 177A to 177F not moved. Clause 71 agreed.