My hon. Friend raises an important point, and I accept the basis on which he does so. Equally, however, there is no doubt a great deal set out in the consultation. I very much hope that the consultation contains some constructive proposals on how we might make an article 4 system work more effectively in practice. I understand his point, but the details are particularly indicative and speculative in these cases because, in general, the Government have rightly taken a policy of not seeking to intervene in local authority applications for article 4 directions, which is a genuinely localist stance. We have in fact made the position more localist by requiring only notification of the article 4 direction, rather than approval by the Secretary of State—a general move back towards localism, which the previous Government never did. That is why I think that, rather than thinking about the indicative costs, we should look at finding a constructive means whereby local authorities have the confidence to use article 4 directions, knowing that they will work and will not create a disproportionate burden.
Growth and Infrastructure Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Robert Neill
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 16 April 2013.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Growth and Infrastructure Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
561 c203 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-07-30 16:47:29 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-04-16/13041638000972
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-04-16/13041638000972
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-04-16/13041638000972