My Lords, first, I thank everybody who took part in the debate and I hope and think that it was a useful debate. It is a little awkward in a way that there is a big debate on the same subject tomorrow. Perhaps it would have been better if that had been a bit later but that is the way the cookie crumbles.
There is one lesson that this Government have increasingly to learn. Their Achilles heel is the way in which they have handled legislation. Surely there is one basic rule of politics that everybody here ought to know: in politics, perception is reality. It is all very well for my noble friend to say, as she charmingly did—perhaps with some justification—that there were some overstatements made by the National Trust particularly, and my noble friend Lord Deben made the same point. How much better would it have been if the Government, in the process of preparing their legislation, had consulted with these bodies instead of, not surprisingly, arousing huge apprehension?
I heard my right honourable friend Mr Pickles saying with triumph, ““A thousand pages of planning experience drawn up over the last 60 years? Away with it! We will bring it down to 50 pages””. That was bound to make people realise that you probably could not put into 50 pages everything that was needed. It would have been a great deal better if they had sat down with people like the National Trust and CPRE before producing all these drafts. Instead, the Prime Minister had to write a letter to the National Trust, saying, ““Please do not get too upset with us, we will talk to you””, and Ministers are now doing so—much better late than never.
I hope for the Government—and perhaps the usual channels on my side will convey this—that this applies not just to this Bill but a number of others, and in future legislation I hope that they will take a little more trouble to consult and prepare the ground and show more sensitivity. I am pleased to feel, from what my noble friend the Minister has just said, that the lesson has got home. I would have confidence in her and I do not have any problem in withdrawing my amendment tonight because I am sure that as the NPPF is a draft, as she said, and is susceptible to being changed, and there are discussions going on about it, we will eventually get the right answer.
However, it matters to a lot of people and there are people who will only get an impression and the impression is what matters. The Government have a lot of work to do in the next year or so to put right the impression that has been created so far. I hope that this lesson has been learned and will be applied to other Bills. I thank everybody for what they have said, and I withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 204C withdrawn.
Amendment 204D not moved.
Amendment 204E
Moved by
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Marlesford
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 October 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
730 c1823-4 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:33:06 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_772515
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_772515
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_772515