I am very grateful for that useful information, and it is good news about the consultation process, but in relation to the question I asked about the number of planners who have been lost, the Minister put a great deal of emphasis on the Killian Pretty review, which was published five years ago. When she comes back to me with those statistics, will she break them down so that we can see the rate of attrition among planners, before and after Killian Pretty, and have some sort of time series? In relation to the questions raised by the noble Lord, Lord Tope, about the evidence, did the Killian Pretty review say why it thought these delays were occurring? There is an absence of hard evidence of what is going wrong in the system. What is the problem we are trying to solve? That is what the Committee is keen to get to the bottom of. Did the Killian Pretty review recommend this as a solution, or is it a solution that has been generated by the department?
Infrastructure Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Andrews
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 10 July 2014.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Infrastructure Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
755 c202GC 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-10-12 15:53:50 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-10/14071064000075
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-10/14071064000075
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-10/14071064000075