Richmond upon Thames Liberal Democrats

Covering the constituencies of Twickenham and Richmond Park

Goldsworthy on the Planning & Energy Bill

2.00.00pm BST (GMT +0100) Mon 12th May 2008

Julia Goldsworthy

' . . The length of my remarks will be inversely proportional to how much I support the Bill, so I will aim to keep them very short indeed . . '

[May 09] Julia Goldsworthy (Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Department for Communities and Local Government; Falmouth & Camborne, Liberal Democrat): The Minister said that some contributions to the debate were briefer than others. The length of my remarks will be inversely proportional to how much I support the Bill, so I will aim to keep them very short indeed.

I join others in congratulating the hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Mr. Fallon) on getting so far so quickly-even though it might not have felt like it at times in the debate on the amendments-and on persuading the Government to respond to the issues raised. To echo the comments of the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Benyon), that experience stands in stark contrast to the experience of the Committee that considered the Sustainable Communities Act 2007, which faced difficulties in moving the issue forward. In developing in this Bill some of the principles that were laid out in that Act, we have all learned how to work with one another to progress such matters. The process has developed what is contained in the 2007 Act.

Many hon. Members present deserve congratulations on their work, as do those hon. Members who are not in the Chamber, but who helped the hon. Member for Sevenoaks to work and rework the wording of the Bill. It is important that we should pay tribute to those without whom the Bill would not have been possible, namely the local councils. They have been driving the agenda forward since 2003 and have demonstrated genuine ambition in what they thought could be achieved in the development of their areas. They include not just Merton council, but other councils that have been blazing the trail and the more than 100 others that are at various stages of trying to push the issue forward. If those councils had not shown what can be achieved and what they want to achieve, we would not be debating the Bill now.

Fundamentally, the Bill is about ensuring that what councils want to achieve is not just enshrined in planning policy statements or the guidance that accompanies them, but put on a statutory footing, so that it becomes less open to the debate and reinterpretation that can make the planning process so destabilising. Many councils have found it difficult to do anything other than conform to the lowest common denominator set by the Government.

The Bill is not about imposing standards on councils, but about allowing those that want to go further in energy efficiency and energy use to do so. Some councils have, up to now, been experiencing difficulties. My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) raised the issue on Second Reading. He highlighted the experience of Cambridge city council, which wants to achieve higher standards, but has been turned down on appeal because of a conservative interpretation of the existing planning policy guidance.

David Howarth (Shadow Solicitor General, Ministry of Justice; Cambridge, Liberal Democrat): I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning the difficulties and frustrations that Cambridge council faced in trying to get higher energy standards through the national system. That is indeed one of the origins of the Bill. It will be a matter of great relief in Cambridge when it is passed. Will she join me in urging the Government to do whatever they can to get the Bill through the other place as quickly as possible? Some developments-in Cambridge and elsewhere-have had to be dealt with under the old rules, which they should not have been. Until the Bill is finally passed, however, such developments will still have to be dealt with in the unsatisfactory way of the past. Speed really is of the essence.

Add your comment

Julia Goldsworthy (Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Department for Communities and Local Government; Falmouth & Camborne, Liberal Democrat): I could not agree more. My hon. Friend's comments contrast with the scenario painted by the hon. Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore) when he presented some of his amending provisions. The hon. Gentleman said that some councils might struggle to fit into a faster time scale; in fact, plenty of councils are champing at the bit to move this issue forward as quickly as possible. Indeed, they often want to impose parity of standards between social and private housing and to extend the provisions to all other developments.

Issues of energy efficiency in the home have been raised, but we are talking about new developments. In social housing, Housing Corporation funding is dependent on higher energy efficiency standards that do not read across to private sector development. The Bill will allow councils to ensure that such read-across and parity of treatment is achieved. They can go beyond minimum standards and impose "standard" levels and requirements for all new buildings in local authority areas.

Andrew Dismore (Hendon, Labour): I am not sure that I have understood the hon. Lady's last point. Presumably, private sector builders would meet higher standards anyway because of the pressures of the housing market. The real problem has always been with social housing, which has been seen as some sort of second-class construction- [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) can intervene if he wants to when I have finished my intervention; he cannot intervene on my intervention. As I was saying, social housing has always been the Cinderella and has seldom reached the high standards that we would expect. I agree that we need to level up standards across the board, but the hon. Lady may be drawing a false distinction in her comments.

Julia Goldsworthy (Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Department for Communities and Local Government; Falmouth & Camborne, Liberal Democrat): I think that the hon. Gentleman is getting confused. What he said may be the case with existing housing stock, but I am trying to praise the Government-his Government-for the higher standards that are coming from Housing Corporation funding, particularly the higher standards that are required for new build social housing. We need to be very careful to distinguish between problems in respect of existing housing stock, whether it be owner-occupied, privately rented or available for social rent, and the new stock. Nowadays it is easier to impose higher standards for social housing because money is involved and the requirements can follow the funding.

The problem for many councils-it will apply until the Bill becomes law-has been the attitude towards risk. More risk-averse councils-those fearful of the cost of losing an appeal-are wary of doing anything other than meet the minimum standards. Some councils have been blazing a trail, but for others it is a risk that they do not want to take. The Bill will minimise the risk, which is why it is so welcome.

The Bill will make a real and tangible change to the approach to climate change, particularly in respect of development. It will allow local authorities to be freer to seek higher standards. I am optimistic that it will act as a catalyst in the race to the top in terms of performance on energy efficiency and energy use. It will contrast with the current system of targets, as it will help to create a lowest common denominator, ensuring that the people at the bottom do not drag their feet, without hindering those who want to race forward to achieve as much as they can. It will give real power to communities, showing what they can achieve in a way that is appropriate to their local circumstances.

The Bill is very specific-that is one of its benefits-and we need to realise that. Massive issues-issues that contribute massively to carbon emissions-remain to be addressed in respect of our existing housing stock, and they have not been tackled by the Bill. We must remember that there are issues that need to be addressed. The Bill's text speaks for itself, as does the degree of support that has been won for it, and I ask the Minister to do everything possible to get it on to the statute book as soon as possible, so that we can see real leadership at local level and allow solutions to local needs to be properly championed by local authorities.

Bookmark this story at: del.icio.usdel.icio.us DiggDigg FacebookFacebook LibDigLibDig redditreddit StumbleUponStumbleUpon
Print this news story
Comment on this news story
Previous news story: Kramer quizzes E Miliband (Sun 11th May 2008).
Next news story: Norman Lamb on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (Tue 13th May 2008).

Printed and hosted by Prater Raines Ltd, 98 Sandgate High Street, Folkestone CT20 3BY.
Published and promoted by Chris Squire on behalf of the Richmond upon Thames Liberal Democrats, 2a Lion Road, Twickenham, TW1 4JQ
The views expressed are those of the party, not of the service provider.