The noble Lord is challenging my view. There is a real risk that a local authority will not refuse an application for 20 homes in a rural area, to use the example I quoted earlier. It will have the approval of the local plan and the neighbourhood plan, but the sustainable drainage option proposal that it can get the developer’s agreement to is for a weak tank underneath the ground, whereas what it actually wants is a sustainable solution that will enhance the housing development in the way described by the noble Baroness, Lady Cumberlege—one that is to the long-term benefit of the area and will increase biodiversity. The developer will not agree to that; it will agree only to a tank under the ground, which is perfectly reasonable under the standards we have at the moment. The local authority might want to go that step further but it cannot. Should the entire application then be turned down—as I say, it has the approval of the local plan, the neighbourhood plan and local people—because the developer will not agree to the sustainable drainage option? That will increase the delay. Local authorities will not do this because of the risks. They will say, “Okay, we will accept the weaker proposals”.
Neighbourhood Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Parminter
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 6 February 2017.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Neighbourhood Planning Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
778 c322GC 
Session
2016-17
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-10-12 15:09:12 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-02-06/17020626000051
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-02-06/17020626000051
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-02-06/17020626000051