YouSaid · the spoken record

Miatta Fahnbulleh

Lines from Political Thinking with Nick Robinson have been withdrawn from this page while we check who is speaking. See the correction.

On the record 2024–2026

1,675
LINES ON RECORD
100
SITTINGS AND EPISODES
1
SOURCE
2024–2026
ON RECORD

hansard

This is everything the corpus holds for Miatta Fahnbulleh. It is not everything they have said on the record.

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and credited to the record it came from, and links to that record wherever it can be linked. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

  1. “We are committed to doing our part to support strategic authorities, to ensure that they are dealing with issues from housing through to transport and the infrastructure that we need, in order to ensure that our rural communities thrive. Members across the House have our commitment that we will do that, so that local plans reflect the composition of different parts of the country, and that we are putting in place the building blocks to ensure that none of our coastal or rural communities are left behind.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  2. “This relates to the point that my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Polly Billington) made about commissioners and the governance arrangements. We are clear that strategic authorities absolutely must think about how they drive the prosperity and wellbeing of their rural and coastal communities. The structures—and, indeed, the policy framework—that they put in place to do that will be in the gift of local leaders and the mayor. That is right, and that is the basis of devolution. What we are trying to do through the Bill—I think we have achieved it through the amendments and the existing provisions—is to ensure that there is a clear framework that strategic authorities and mayors are working towards. We as a Government absolutely recognise the important role that coastal and rural communities play.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  3. “I would like to put on record my thanks to the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade), who has been a consistent advocate for town and parish councils, both in Committee and in the House. Our amendment in lieu provides that regulations made under clause 60 may provide for parish councils to be represented on neighbourhood governance structures. This locks in the importance of town and parish councils within the new neighbourhood framework that we are putting in place. It places beyond doubt the expectation that local authorities should engage with parish councils about parish representation under that framework.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  4. “My hon. Friend is completely right. Indeed, the reason that the Government originally resisted this amendment was on that very point. Ultimately, we believed that the framework and the set of competences that we had set out were broad enough to capture the complexities of different areas with a mix of urban, rural and coastal. However, we understood the strength of feeling in the other place and we have made this concession. Now it is for our local leaders, through the context of devolution, to ensure that they come together to put in place a plan that can deal with the specifics of their area. Let me turn to the points on town and parish councils that hon. Members have raised. I have been consistent through the passage of this Bill that we absolutely recognise the importance of town and parish councils.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  5. “We are criticised for being centralising, and I have pushed back against that constantly. I think it would be hugely centralising to say that, irrespective of what your community wants—whether it is an area or ward forum, a neighbourhood forum or a structure that already exists—central Government think you must have this model and this model only, and that is not the approach we are taking. Yes, we recognise the importance of town and parish councils, but we ultimately think it must be left to communities and local areas to decide the right neighbourhood governance structure for them that represents what the community wants and can be the voice for the community to drive the change that they want to see.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  6. “I absolutely agree that communities are a fundamental level. Part of the reason we are putting in place a neighbourhood governance structure is to address the point that my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet made, which is that at the moment the neighbourhood structure is not built within our framework for local government. We believe that communities must be empowered, and this is an important step to rectify that. Where we disagree, however, is that I think it is wrong for Government to impose on places any particular neighbourhood governance structure. It is absolutely right that it is left to local areas to decide the right neighbourhood governance structure for them. Town and parish councils exist across 80% of our geography, so in many areas they will be the default, but in other areas they may not be.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  7. “The hon. Member is completely right. There is a gap, and we are putting in this provision for a neighbourhood governance structure across the country to address that gap. Many areas that do not have town and parish councils will have other mechanisms in place. I point to my borough of Southwark, where we have area committees that work really well and represent the community. The key principle here, however, is that it must be for the community to determine the right structure that represents their area and can be an effective voice. We cannot and must not dictate from central Government.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  8. “My hon. Friend makes a good point. We as a Government are committed to putting in place a neighbourhood governance framework, and that framework will set in place the key principles. It will be a guide for what effective, strong neighbourhood governance looks like. We will put in place regulation and guidance to support local authorities as they go through the endeavour of working with their communities to put the right structure in place. We have done a huge amount of work with the sector, and have taken evidence, which has informed the principles, but one of the big messages we got from everyone across the sector is: “Whatever you do, do not dictate what this looks like; build on what exists, and ultimately leave it to communities and local areas to come up with the right model for them.” When the sector speaks, we listen.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  9. “I have been clear that the NPPF is the framework under which planning policy and decisions are and should be made, and it remains the most appropriate tool for supporting brownfield development.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  10. “We are driving forward community power—something I am fundamentally passionate about and committed to—but we have balanced that with the imperative that national Government must not dictate the structure; that must be left to local areas to decide. I would like to pick up on “brownfield first”, raised by the hon. Members for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner, and for Guildford (Zöe Franklin). I continue to stress that the Government fully agree with, and support, the principle of “brownfield first”. There is no difference in policy intent here, and there never has been. We have demonstrated our commitment by strengthening support for brownfield development in national policy in December 2024, and we proposed further changes earlier this year.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  11. “We were clear that, ultimately, we would ask local areas to come forward with a range of proposals, based on a set of criteria. They have done that, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness is judging the proposals that have come forward against the objective criteria that have been set. What we would not do—I will never concede on this point—is nothing, because that would have left local government collapsing at the very time when our communities need it to be working. I reassure hon. Members that we think that we have struck the right balance, particularly on town and parish council governance. We are clear that town and parish councils have an important role.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  12. “I have had this debate many times with the hon. Member. His Government were in power for over a decade and oversaw the decimation and denuding of local authorities through a sustained period of austerity. His Government saw that local authorities were not sustainable, yet did not act. It falls to this Government to recognise those failures. We care about having strong local government that can deliver services for communities. Local government reorganisation is neither easy nor fun—it is hugely time-consuming, and we know that it is a difficult endeavour for our local authorities—but it was a necessity because of the previous Government’s failure to act for nearly a decade and a half. They saw the failings and issues in local government and did not respond; we have not done that.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  13. “My hon. Friend is completely right: we need to build more homes. We are absolutely committed to doing that, but they have to be the right homes for communities. That is why this Government are investing £39 billion to ensure that we have the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation. We must build homes that our communities can afford, and that are appropriate for our communities.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  14. “The amendment is fundamentally centralising, and we would be much better off trying to achieve “brownfield first”, an objective that we all agree on, through a policy that gives local leaders the flexibility to apply policy in a way that makes sense for their area.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  15. “We are as impatient as my hon. Friend is to get building on brownfield land, so we are working closely with all our authorities and strategic authorities to ensure that they have the power and tools to do that. We recognise that a big barrier to building on brownfield land is funding. This Government committed a record amount—£5 billion over the spending review—to supporting the remediation of brownfield sites, so that we can unlock the development that we all want. The Opposition, who are pushing this amendment, accuse us of centralising, yet the amendment would, by its very nature, remove flexibility, whereas the Bill allows our local leaders, be it at regional or local authority level, the flexibility to deploy policy in a way that makes sense for their area.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  16. “It makes it explicit that the decision-making policies should not be repeated in local plans and provides for these policies to bear on the system from day one. That is why we have not taken forward statutory national development management policies at this stage, although we are keeping that decision under review.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  17. “I absolutely agree with the points and concerns that have been raised. National planning policy exerts a significant influence on the planning system in two principal ways. Plan-making authorities must have regard to national policy when preparing development plans that form the basis for decision making, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. National policy itself is a material consideration, meaning that the NPPF can have a powerful and immediate effect on planning decisions, allowing policy changes to take effect quickly. Furthermore, the new draft framework aims to improve delivery across the planning system by setting out much clearer policies for plan making and decision making.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  18. “My hon. Friend is absolutely right; I could not have put it better myself. If we believe in “brownfield first”, which we do, then it has to be enabled. That requires funding, which requires political will, which we Labour Members have, but which is sadly too often missing from the Opposition. I turn to agents of change. I thank hon. Members for their contributions on the subject, particularly my hon. Friends the Members for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel), and for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson), who talked knowledgeably, articulately and persuasively on this question. I reiterate our strong reason for maintaining the view that a policy approach is best suited to addressing issues of implementation, when it comes to the agent of change. As with “brownfield first”, there is no difference in policy here.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  19. “He is content to meet to discuss what more can be done, but I hope that Members hear the Government when we say that we agree with the policy intent and that the national planning policy should be strengthened—we are undertaking that. We think there is an opportunity to make more progress through the local plan, and we are committed to working with local authorities to do that. We have committed to working with Members from across the House to ensure that this bites in the way that Members are keen for it to bite.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  20. “Local plans can include community facilities, and we are committed to looking at ways, through the local plan, that we can strengthen the policy intent that we all agree that we are trying to achieve. First, we intend to work closely with local planning authorities, once the new NPPF is finalised, to ensure that the policy is fully understood and implemented. As my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central said, there is a discrepancy between planning considerations and what is actually enforced. We recognise that discrepancy and are looking at what more can be done to ensure that local planning authorities are enforcing planning conditions related to this important issue. My hon. Friend the Minister for Housing is very exercised by this issue and is grateful for all the contributions that have been made by hon. Friends.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  21. “I am always very happy to commit my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing to any meeting that my hon. Friends would like. We are very keen to meet in advance of the NPPF biting. May I also say a word about support for the music industry? My hon. Friends have talked with great passion about the music industry in their constituencies, and have shown that they care about it. The Government are absolutely committed to supporting the UK music industry as part of our industrial strategy. We will soon publish a music plan, drawing together all that the Government are doing to support the music industry, which is a vital part of our communities, cultural heritage and local economies. That includes a £30 million music growth package over three years from 2026, to support domestic growth, talent development and music exports.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  22. “We recognise that it will be important for non-rural authorities to have the opportunity to build capacity and effective partnership working before taking on the deepest powers and funding at mayoral level. For that reason, the Government are removing the power for the Secretary of State to provide directly for a mayor in an area without local consent. We believe that that strikes the right balance, but I encourage Members from across the House to judge us by our actions.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  23. “Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I got far too excited about the music industry. Suffice it to say that the Government recognise its importance. That is why the debate about the agent of change is so important, and why we are committed to playing our part in supporting that aim. I turn to the Bill and the amendments. Let me pick up on the amendments relating to the removal of the Secretary of State’s directed powers. The Government have committed to not commencing powers to direct the establishment of non-mayoral strategic authorities for a period of two years following Royal Assent. That will provide sufficient time for areas that do not currently have devolution agreements to develop workable proposals based on sensible geographies. At the same time, we have also listened and responded to concerns expressed in the other place.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  24. “That matters, because devolution works well when we have strong institutions, predicated on partnership between local authorities that understand their place and are willing to act collectively for it. We will not use the approach of imposing on places; rather, we will ensure that there is local consent. That is why the amendment works.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  25. “I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. That is exactly what happened under the approach adopted by the Conservative party in government. It created random boundaries and involved ad hoc devolution that did not treat our local leaders as equal partners who know their communities and can drive change. That is not our approach. I ask Members to consider the approach that we are taking by setting up strategic authorities. We have gone to places and asked, “What is the local partnership that works for your place? Which geography means that you can drive the outcomes that your community wants?” We are not dictating from Whitehall; we are leaving this to local areas.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  26. “The role that we will play is to work with our local authorities. Ultimately, the common thread is that we are working in service of and on behalf of communities, and it is for both national Government and local leaders to make decisions on the geography that makes sense for local economies and that works for their community. We will always advocate for the community in those conversations to ensure that we get the right partnership that can deliver for places.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  27. “It is beholden on all of us to make sure that this Bill does get Royal Assent, because this is the first step towards fundamentally changing the settlement between this place—between Government—and our communities, who do not feel that they have power and agency, and who do not feel that change is being driven in the way that they want. We have to rebalance that. This is the first step, and I implore Members across the House to support the Government’s position. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House does not insist on its disagreement to Lords Amendment 2 but proposes Amendment (a) to the Lords Amendment. After Clause 37 Brownfield land priority Motion made, and Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in their Amendments 89B and 89C .—(Miatta Fahnbulleh.)”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  28. “I implore Members across the House, particularly given that 80% of local authorities are already deploying the model that we are talking about, that we are keen to make progress and allow our local authorities to move forward. In conclusion—[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] No one is more pleased about that than me. In conclusion, I thank Members for their contributions and the constructive way in which they have engaged with the Bill. I hope that they see that we are a Government who are absolutely committed to pushing power into our places and our communities.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  29. “But we are very clear that we are having to fix the mess of the last Government, which did absolutely nothing for local government and allowed a decade in which local government was denuded—I come back to that. Our job now is to ensure that we build strong local authority institutions, because we are localists: we believe in devolution, but we need strong institutions to do that. That means both having structures that work for the communities they represent and in which, critically, decisions can be made to improve the lot of their place. We believe that the cabinet and leader model works. We think that we have found the right balance.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  30. “We have set out the framework for a devolution deal, we have set out the progress that we are making to recognise minority status, and we are committed to moving further in the days and weeks to come. The Government’s approach to local authority governance arrangements has been pragmatic. We are ultimately trying to reach solutions that we believe will bite and work in places. I remind Members across the House that 80% of local authorities are already deploying the cabinet and leader model, and it is an effective model that allows strong decision making for communities. In areas that already have a democratic mandate for an alternative—whether committee or mayor—we have created the space for those structures to continue.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  31. “I was just coming to the hon. Member’s earlier contributions. We absolutely want to move at the pace at which our most ambitious and fastest-moving places want to move. We recognise the unique circumstances in Cornwall. I have spent a lot of time with hon. Friends from across Cornwall, who have been very passionate, effective and robust advocates for their place. I had the pleasure of visiting Cornwall and seeing some of the issues, as well as the huge amount of work and innovation. We have invested £28.6 million in the current industrial growth fund—creating 300 jobs and an additional 1,000 jobs in the supply chain—because we understand and recognise the economic potential of the area. We are committed to working with the council and with Cornwall MPs to take that further.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  32. “This Government were elected with a clear mandate to deliver change, but to deliver change that people can see and feel, we must empower our communities. We are therefore determined to build a different type of state where local leaders and communities with skin in the game are given power and control to shape the things that matter in their place and in their lives. Our English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill is a critical, bold step in delivering that. It will drive the biggest transfer of power out of Whitehall to our regions and our communities in a generation. It sets a floor for devolution, and we intend to build on the foundation set out in the Bill to give communities the power and control they are demanding to drive the change they want to see in their place.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  33. “On Report, the Government introduced amendments to the Licensing Act 2003 and created a new strategic licensing role for the Mayor of London. That included an amendment to create a new duty on the Mayor of London to determine and publish a new strategic licensing policy.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  34. “The next group of important changes that the Government made in the other place concerns local accountability and scrutiny. The Government committed to exploring a local Public Accounts Committee model in the English devolution White Paper. We recognised that greater powers of local scrutiny are needed to reflect the increased scale of responsibility that will be devolved to mayoral strategic authorities through the Bill. To that end, Lords amendments 7, 137 and 138 introduce local scrutiny committees, which replace overview and scrutiny committees in mayoral combined and combined county authorities. Local scrutiny committees will provide an enhanced scrutiny regime with stronger oversight, a broader remit to reflect the scale of mayoral responsibilities and greater teeth to hold mayors to account.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  35. “Following the insightful contribution of peers, Lords amendment 1 adds culture as a distinct area of competence within clause 2 of the Bill. By doing so, the Government are sending a clear signal on the role that strategic authorities can and should continue to play in supporting cultural initiatives, as well as recognising the important role that culture in its many forms plays in enriching quality of life and supporting local economic growth. We are also improving the operational flexibility of the commissioner model introduced by the Bill. Lords amendments 3 and 5 increase the potential number of commissioners to 10, and Lords amendments 125, 127, 129, 131, 133 and 135 allow more than one commissioner to operate in a single area of competence.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  36. “The question of unitarisation is being dealt with. Applications have been made and the Government are going through the process and looking at the objective criteria. No doubt the hon. Member has had many conversations with the Minister for Housing and Planning on these matters. I will, however, try to focus the hon. Member’s mind and attention on the key premise of this Bill, which is community empowerment and devolution, and on the Lords amendments we are discussing. Before speaking to the Lords amendments, I thank my noble Friend Baroness Taylor for so ably guiding the Bill through the other place. I put on record my appreciation to all peers who contributed to its scrutiny. I will begin with the Government amendments that were made in the other place.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  37. “I thank my hon. Friend for asking an important question, and for his ongoing engagement in this area. Let me take his question in the context of what we are trying to do through the Bill. The Government are really clear, and Baroness Taylor made it very clear in the other place, that we recognise that licensing authorities are often best placed to make licensing decisions, based on their local knowledge. In that context, the evidence provided by licensing authorities will have a significant role in both the design of the policy and the determination of potential strategic importance.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  38. “On pavement parking, which affects communities across the country and disproportionately harms people with mobility or sight impairment, as well as those with prams or pushchairs, who rely on safe, accessible pavements to move around independently, this Government are committed to creating safer, more inclusive streets. Lords amendments 41 and 158 will enable the Secretary of State to make regulations under which English local transport authorities are able to prohibit the parking of motor vehicles on pavements in their area. The regulations will include details on how local transport authorities will exercise the power to prohibit pavement parking, on which vehicles would be excluded and on permissive exemptions.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  39. “Finally and crucially, where cumulative impact zones have been designated by boroughs, this will remain the case, and the mayor must have regard to the cumulative impact assessment. We hope that we have designed this policy in a way that provides a balance between growth, residential amenities and safeguarding the protection of local communities. As we design the detail of potential strategic importance, we are committed to working with Members from across the House, as well as our licensing authorities, to ensure that we get this right.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  40. “The licensing objectives that seek to protect and safeguard local communities will apply, and the mayor will be required to have regard to them when exercising the powers conferred through the amendment. The Government are incredibly clear that there must be the right balance between encouraging the growth of hospitality and the night-time economy, which we want to do, and protecting the needs of local communities and their places. The safeguarding and reassurance that are required are locked into the way that we have designed this policy. As I have said, local licensing authorities will continue to be the default decision makers, so the mayor must have regard to the evidence that they provide to determine the decisions that they make.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  41. “I will come back to that point, because it relates to an amendment that I would like to speak to, but I want to fully address the point that has been made about call-in powers with regard to licensing. My hon. Friends the Members for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman), for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake), for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier), for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi), and for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) have provided clear, insightful feedback and constructive engagement, and they have done a fantastic job of representing the concerns of their constituents. Let me reassure them on all the key points that they have raised. It is important to put on the record that the amendment will be embedded in the Licensing Act 2003.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  42. “We have a policy that wherever there are new powers—whether they are conferred to local authorities or combined authorities—the new burdens principle is in place. In designing this policy, we will work really closely with local authorities to ensure that we are doing enforcement in a way that bites for our communities in the way that they want to see.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  43. “We will be learning insights from Edinburgh and the other places that have applied the provision, and we will be providing further details and guidance on how it could work. In doing that, we will try to strike a balance between setting out an overall framework that enables places to put this in place and allowing places to use their discretion and local knowledge to make sure it works in their interests.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  44. “Crucially, the amendment does not—it does not—weaken protections for public recreational land. It introduces a rigorous evidenced-based process overseen by the Secretary of State, with strict qualifying conditions and robust publicity requirements. It has a broad public interest test at its heart, which includes environmental and heritage considerations. By providing a clear route to fix the gap in the law, the amendment ensures decisions about land previously held for public enjoyment are taken in the interests of the public. For those reasons, the Government support the amendment.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  45. “Lords amendment 42, moved by Lord Banner, fixes a current gap in the law where land held on statutory trusts was previously appropriated or disposed of without complying with the statutory advertisement requirements under the Local Government Act 1972. The law currently provides no legal mechanism to resolve this situation, resulting in difficult and protracted legal wranglings. While this will apply in only a very small number of cases, the Government do not believe that historic procedural errors should be left unresolved, especially when that risk is preventing the delivery of environmental improvements, or improvements to community facilities. The amendment creates a mechanism for the Secretary of State to intervene in these rare cases to determine whether the land should remain in a statutory trust or be disposed of.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  46. “Furthermore, we are already considering changes to strengthen this duty, because we recognise the arguments that my hon. Friend has made. As the House will be aware, we recently consulted on a new national planning policy framework that would strengthen this policy and ensure that the principle is effectively applied to protect businesses while building the houses the country desperately needs. Today, I can commit to publishing updated planning policy guidance on the agent of change principle, following the publication of the final national planning policy framework. This guidance will ensure consistent application of the principle and a fair approach across local planning authorities. I hope that will be enough to satisfy my hon. Friend, and I urge the House to disagree with Lords amendment 41.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  47. “As my hon. Friend says, Lord amendment 41, with Lords amendment 95, would place the agent of change principle on a statutory footing in the planning and licensing and statutory nuisance regimes. While I and the Government respect the concerns raised in the other place and those he has raised about how in some cases new homes are adversely affecting existing businesses and cultural venues in their vicinity, we are not persuaded that the amendment is necessary, given the changes to the planning system already in progress. The agent of change principle is already firmly embedded in national planning policy, and both the licensing and the statutory nuisance frameworks give local decision makers the flexibility to factor it in, where relevant to the circumstances of particular cases.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  48. “I disagree with the hon. Gentleman, because the issue is still the responsibility of the local authority. The amendment is trying to get to those specific cases where the local authority has not applied the proper process to dispose of land and then we are in limbo; it creates a mechanism by which to resolve that. There is a process in place for local authorities to choose to dispose of land, or maintain it in statutory trusts. That is not affected by this amendment. This is trying to get to those situations where it has not been discharged properly. There is currently a gap in the legislation, which we hope this amendment responds to.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  49. “For most decisions, the default will become a simple majority, but that does not apply for mayoral budgets, which will continue to require a two-thirds majority to amend. Given that mayors and combined authorities may have their budgets amended only by a two-thirds majority, the Government believe that these amendments would bring scrutiny of London’s mayoral budget out of line with other strategic authorities. We therefore do not support the amendments and urge the House to reject them.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  50. “Lords amendment 4 seeks to ensure that appointments of commissioners by mayors are made through a fair and open selection process. On this, we agree. That is why the Government have published statutory guidance that sets out the selection, appointment and remuneration process. We hope that doing so satisfies the points raised in the other House. Lords amendments 13 and 87 seek to reduce the threshold needed for the London Assembly to amend the Mayor of London’s final draft budget from a two-thirds majority to a simple majority, which was the point the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) was making. It is the Government’s intention to simplify and ensure consistency in voting arrangements across all our strategic authorities, including the Greater London Authority.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗