Localism Bill (ways and means)

The hon. Gentleman has got the wrong end of the stick. It is not required that the planning application should be determined on the basis of the financial flow. It is relevant only if it relates to the planning matter before the authority. For example, if the community infrastructure levy is to be used to pay for an access road, it is perfectly reasonable—this is clarified in the new clause—for that to be taken into account by the local authority. I want to make some progress, because I have spoken for 45 minutes. My hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Stephen Gilbert) has tabled a new clause—new clause 4—that would introduce what he describes as a limited right of appeal for third parties against planning applications, just as he did in Committee. Let me make a few points about that. In the first place, I fear that the drafting of new clause 4 is technically defective. The drafting of proposed new section 78(2B)(c) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 would allow any overview and scrutiny committee anywhere in the country to appeal against planning permission granted by a wholly different authority. Clearly it is not his intention that his planning committee in Cornwall should appeal against a decision in Tunbridge Wells, so whatever happens, he needs to take that into account. The second point is that new clause 4 does not address—as it would need to if it were accepted—the crucial point of what happens in the meantime if planning permission is granted by a local council. Is that permission to be held in abeyance, awaiting a possible appeal, or can planning permission be implemented in the meantime? If a development goes ahead and there is a successful appeal, would that development need to be demolished? If work is started on a development that needs to be interrupted, is anyone liable for compensation if the permission is overturned on appeal? There are therefore a few technical deficiencies with new clause 4 that would need to be considered.