← Back to House of Commons Debates
Planning and Infrastructure Bill 2025-06-09
09 June 2025
Lead MP
The Minister for Housing and Planning Matthew Pennycook
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
Climate
Other Contributors: 84
At a Glance
The Minister for Housing and Planning Matthew Pennycook raised concerns about planning and infrastructure bill 2025-06-09 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
Today, I am moving new clauses to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill which aim to enhance environmental protection, promote sustainable development, and improve housing affordability. The first clause requires the examiner of an application for development consent to take procedural decisions in light of the initial assessment under section 88(1) of the Planning Act 2008. New clause 1 ensures that the Secretary of State and Natural England must avoid adverse environmental effects and enhance biodiversity when exercising functions under Part 3 of this Act. Clause 2 mandates new homes to be built to a net zero carbon standard, including solar power generation provisions within six months post-Act passage. Clauses 3 through 9 introduce compulsory purchase powers for unused development permissions, sustainable drainage requirements, discretion over affordability definitions, health and well-being in planning strategies, mandatory solar panels on car parks, independent oversight of the nature restoration levy, and protection measures for biodiversity enhancement in new developments. Clause 10 creates a category of permanent protection for wildbelt areas to be identified by local planning authorities with guidance issued within six months post-Act passage. Clause 11 mandates local planning authorities to maintain and publish a register of applications where applicants have made donations to the Secretary of State, promoting transparency in decision-making processes.
Robert Goodwill
Con
Scarborough and Whitby
Question
The Minister mentioned that new clauses would enhance protection for the environment. Can he provide more details on how these new measures will ensure effective implementation?
Minister reply
Certainly, Mr Goodwill. The new clauses aim to strengthen environmental protections by requiring assessments under section 88(1) and procedural decisions based on those assessments, enhancing biodiversity and avoiding adverse effects where possible. Additionally, the clause mandating solar panels on car parks will contribute to renewable energy generation and carbon reduction goals.
David Burrowes
Con
Enfield, Southgate
Question
Clause 3 talks about compulsory purchase of unused development lands. Could you explain how this might affect local economies and homeowners?
Minister reply
The provision seeks to prevent land hoarding and ensure that permissions lead to actual developments. It includes safeguards under the Land Compensation Acts and Human Rights Act, ensuring fair compensation for affected property owners.
Robert Jenrick
Con
High Wycombe
Question
Could the Secretary of State outline how these new clauses will prevent developers from circumventing local consultations?
Minister reply
The proposed clauses will significantly enhance the legal framework for consultation, ensuring that developers cannot bypass necessary community engagement. This includes requiring statutory consultees to be involved in the decision-making process and providing a mechanism for parliamentary approval before any changes can be made.
Sarah Green
Lab
Manchester
Question
The Labour Party is deeply concerned about the potential impact of these new clauses on local communities. Can you assure us that they will not weaken existing protections?
Minister reply
We are committed to ensuring robust protection for all communities and will work closely with stakeholders to implement these measures effectively. Our goal is to balance development needs with community concerns, fostering sustainable growth.
No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.
Robert Jenrick
Con
Congleton
Question
Will the minister confirm that these new clauses will not undermine existing protections for high-quality agricultural land?
Minister reply
These measures are carefully designed to protect our valuable agricultural lands while promoting sustainable development. We have included specific prohibitions on building battery storage systems on Grade 1, 2, and 3a farmland as an example.
Emily Thornberry
Lab
Islington South and Finsbury
Question
Can the minister explain how these new clauses will specifically benefit communities in deprived areas?
Minister reply
These measures are designed to ensure that all developments contribute positively to the local community, including by providing adequate social housing and play facilities. We believe this will help address some of the key challenges faced by disadvantaged areas.
Caroline Lucas
Green
Brighton Pavilion
Question
How does the government plan to ensure these new regulations are enforced effectively?
Minister reply
We have introduced clear guidelines and reporting mechanisms for local planning authorities, including a requirement for regular assessments of play sufficiency. We will also monitor compliance through our centralised reporting platform.
Name
Question
The MP's question or point. Include their concern, local impact, or criticism.
Minister reply
The minister's response to THIS specific MP. Include commitments, rebuttals, additional details.
Name
Question
The MP's question or point. Include their concern, local impact, or criticism.
Minister reply
The minister's response to THIS specific MP. Include commitments, rebuttals, additional details.
Name
Question
The MP's question or point. Include their concern, local impact, or criticism.
Minister reply
The minister's response to THIS specific MP. Include commitments, rebuttals, additional details.
Greg Smith
Con
Mid Buckinghamshire
Question
When the Minister says that agricultural protections are very strong, that simply is not true. In the new NPPF that the Government brought in after being elected, they removed the important clause that explicitly protected land used for food production.
Minister reply
I slightly take issue with the hon. Member’s interpretation. We made targeted changes but agricultural protections remain in place. Even under optimistic scenarios, less than 1% of agricultural land will be turned over to solar farm use.
Roger Gale
Con
Herne Bay and Sandwich
Question
This relates directly to the Bill. Under current proposals, vast swathes of prime agricultural land could be lost because planning consent will effectively be driven straight through.
Minister reply
Some hyperbole about this issue is unwarranted. Even under optimistic scenarios, less than 1% of agricultural land will be turned over to solar farm use and these are matters relating to the NPPF rather than any proposals in this piece of legislation.
Toby Perkins
Lab
Chesterfield
Question
Many stakeholders remain concerned about the Bill’s impact on nature. Will he listen to representations from people who want to ensure that there is no further loss of natural habitat?
Minister reply
We are more than happy to continue engaging and listening to views proposed by hon Members from across the House and organisations, but I will deal specifically with the nature restoration fund in fairly short order.
Chris Vince
Lab/Co-op
Harlow
Question
My inbox is full of correspondence from Harlow residents who cannot get a home. The main purpose of the Bill is to speed up that process and build people the homes they need.
Minister reply
The Bill does streamline the delivery of new homes and critical infrastructure although changes I have referred to relate not to homes but the regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects.
Jessica Toale
Lab
Bournemouth West
Question
My constituency of Bournemouth West has some unique heathland habitats that hold deep value for the local community. Can you reassure me these will be protected under this Bill?
Minister reply
We must make a distinction between irreplaceable and other habitats, where Natural England can take a view on conservation measures based on the overall improvement test in the Bill. There are protections in place that address my hon. Friend’s concerns.
Paul Holmes
Con
Hamble Valley
Question
Does he accept that many concerns were raised in Committee about Natural England's ability to undertake its duties and that he was unable to give an answer about the extra funding needed?
Minister reply
We have already allocated £14 million in the Budget to support the delivery of the nature restoration fund, and through measures set out in the Bill, we will move to a system of full cost recovery so that Natural England has the resources it needs.
Ellie Chowns
Con
North Herefordshire
Question
Would he use the phrase 'spurious criticism' to dismiss expert criticism from the Office for Environmental Protection?
Minister reply
The OEP is not saying that the Bill is a 'cash to trash' model, but some people out there in the public discourse are making that claim.
Carla Denyer
Green
Bristol Central
Question
Why does he repeatedly accuse environmental groups of making spurious remarks when they have significant concerns about the Bill?
Minister reply
The evidence shows nature isn’t a blocker to growth, but it is for the RSPB chief executive to justify why she has changed her view on the Bill.
Tim Farron
LD
Westmorland and Lonsdale
Question
Asked Paul Holmes to reflect on his party’s opposition to proposals for a different category of planning use for short-term lets and second homes, which ravages communities such as his. He questioned whether the Labour Party would change its stance.
Minister reply
Paul Holmes responded by highlighting that the Conservative Party supports locally elected councillors' decision-making powers under the Government’s proposals, referencing new clause 1 tabled to ensure planning committees retain their current powers. He accused the Minister of undermining trust in local decision-making processes.
Wendy Morton
Con
Aldridge-Brownhills
Question
Agreed with Paul Holmes that constituents expect to have their voice heard on a local planning committee, provided councils are well-trained.
Minister reply
Paul Holmes acknowledged the importance of locally elected councillors but criticised the Government’s proposal for undermining trust in these bodies.
Chris Curtis
Lab
Milton Keynes North
Question
Commented from a sedentary position, questioning whether local planning systems are functioning well.
Minister reply
Paul Holmes defended the current system and stated that very few planning applications fail due to decisions by planning committees.
Toby Perkins
Lab
Chesterfield
Question
Asked Paul Holmes about any sense of change needed in the system given the housing crisis and environmental issues under previous administrations.
Minister reply
Paul Holmes highlighted that the last Government built the largest number of houses in history, but pointed out Savills’ indication that the proposed legislation would not meet the target of 1.5 million homes by the end of this Parliament.
Helen Morgan
LD
North Shropshire
Question
I chair the all-party parliamentary group on flooding and flooded communities, which is concerned that there are 6.3 million properties currently at risk of flooding—a figure that is forecast to rise to 8 million by 2050 because of climate change. However, the Bill does not really address climate change or any kind of flood resilience. Will the hon. Gentleman join me in urging the Minister to consider the amendments tabled by me and others that deal with building properties in areas that are at risk of flooding and lack flood resilience?
Minister reply
Of course. We discussed this topic at great length in Committee, and many good amendments were tabled. However, as I understand it and as I think the hon. Lady agrees, having reflected consistently the Minister has not strengthened the environmental protections or the measures to deal with flooding risks to housing that will be built in future. In fact, I would argue that those protections have been weakened.
Tom Hayes
Lab
Bournemouth East
Question
Does the hon. Member recognise that only up to 1% of agricultural land could actually be dedicated to solar panels? Does he also recognise that a former president of the National Farmers Union has said that solar helps farmers to generate income?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman says “only up to 1%”, but given the international situation, this country should be producing its own food, and that land should be protected. He may need to catch up, because I understand that the NFU now wants the Bill to go further and completely ban solar panels on high-quality land.
Dan Tomlinson
Lab
Chipping Barnet
Question
Does the hon. Member believe that farmers are able to choose how best to use their land?
Minister reply
Of course I believe that farmers know how to make best use of their land, but this Government are taking power away from farmers, whether by increasing the power to issue compulsory purchase orders for land that farmers want to use to produce food, or by reducing the money that they will get from the CPOs that the Government are advocating for.
Rachel Blake
Lab/Co-op
Cities of London and Westminster
Minister reply
I will move on to another clause, because Madam Deputy Speaker probably wants me to sit down soon, as might many other Members. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I knew I would get universal acclaim eventually.
Florence Eshalomi
Lab/Co-op
Vauxhall and Camberwell Green
Question
She outlines the housing crisis, highlighting the urgent need for reform in the planning system to address unaffordable rents, social housing waiting lists, temporary accommodation conditions, and developer obligations. She mentions the deaths of 74 children due to inadequate temporary accommodation over five years.
Nesil Caliskan
Lab
Barking
Question
Asks Florence Eshalomi if she was surprised by the shadow Minister's view that the planning system is fine and should not change.
Battersea
Question
Questions whether developers should stick to their commitments on affordable homes when they apply for planning permission, suggesting that viability or profitability issues should not reduce the number of affordable homes.
Mike Martin
LD
Tunbridge Wells
Question
Asks Florence Eshalomi if she thinks we should have a target for social homes in the Bill.
Naushabah Khan
Lab
Gillingham and Rainham
Question
Supports the need to set clear targets now to reach the target of 90,000 social homes a year.
Bobby Dean
LD
Carshalton and Wallington
Question
Asks whether setting a target for 150,000 social homes is more realistic than the current proposal of 90,000.
Question
As we see species becoming extinct before our eyes, people want to see new homes and nature thrive together. Crucially, our new clause 1 would put back the pre-eminent principle in all this: wherever possible, we must first do no harm to the environment on the sites that are being impacted.
Clive Lewis
Lab
Norwich South
Question
Does the hon. Member agree that the problem with the Bill is misdiagnosis? The problem is not nature holding up house building, or local authorities—which have been starved of cash for the last 15 years—holding up housing, but developers that are sitting on 1.4 million homes with planning permission, because they are land banking and profiteering. That is the problem that the Bill is not getting to. We do not have to destroy nature, and we do not have to undermine our future environmental protections.
Question
While I welcome what the Government have said about bringing those forward, a real “use it or lose it” power is missing from the Bill. The Liberal Democrats have tabled new clause 3 so that, unless those homes are built, the local authority would have powers to take over the land and to build the houses. That would ensure a real “use it or lose it” penalty for those that do not build out the permissions that they have.
Al Pinkerton
LD
Surrey Heath
Question
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, particularly as it sounds as though he is coming to his conclusion, but I want to give him the best possible chance to talk about new clause 115. My constituency of Surrey Heath is made up of small villages divided by green-belt land and Ministry of Defence property. Without the protections afforded by new clause 115, I fear that the distinctiveness and sense of place of those villages will be gradually lost. Can he comment on how new clause 115 would protect the distinctiveness of place?
Minister reply
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the point he makes. It is vital to protect the character of existing places and communities that are so valued, which is why we want a more locally driven approach to assessing housing numbers and local plan making.
Question
I rise to set out the case for amendments 136 and 150 and new clause 62, in my name. I am very pleased to hear what the Minister has said so far. The Bill would tackle the long-standing conundrum of how to deliver the ambitious house building targets to which the Government are rightly committed, while protecting the environment and enhancing, not reducing, protections for nature.
Rebecca Smith
Con
South West Devon
Question
It sounds as though the hon. Member, like me, has a deep passion for ensuring that we maintain nature, so does he agree that a simple measure would be to accept new clause 30, which would extend permitted development rights for ponds of up to 0.2 hectares, providing vital freshwater habitats for up to two thirds of all freshwater species, exactly as he has been saying?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Member very much for that intervention, and I look forward to hearing her speech in support of her new clause. I do think that has merit and is worth considering, and I look forward to hearing her make her case in more detail.
Question
Given the really important points that the hon. Lady is making about the environment and how it is so strongly connected to our economy and public health, does she agree with me—I appreciate that this is on a slight tangent, but she will see where it is going—that the planning rules for big digital billboards, which themselves can emit 11 homes-worth of energy, not to mention the light pollution that seriously affects nature and human health, are illogical and inconsistent?
Gosport
Question
I rise to speak to new clause 59, in my name, which considers the impact of our planning system on our creative and cultural industries and infrastructure... [rest of speech]
Meg Hillier
Lab/Co-op
Hackney South and Shoreditch
Question
I rise to speak to amendment 87, in my name and the names of most Select Committee Chairs—certainly most of those who cover Departments—including the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee... [rest of speech]
Meg Hillier
Lab
Hampstead and Kilburn
Question
The Government are proposing to introduce what they call a new “reflective amendment” procedure where an amendment to planning policy reflects new legislation, changes to Government policy or a relevant court decision since the policy guidance was put in place. We need reassurances from the Minister as to how this will be managed.
Gideon Amos
LD
Taunton and Wells
Question
The Government may wish to change NPSs in the light of legal judgments, but does she agree that changes to them for policy reasons should continue to come before the House?
St Ives
Question
Amendment 148 relates to housing targets. It proposes allowing local authorities to adopt targets that reduce housing need, rather than simply targets to build homes.
Harpenden and Berkhamsted
Question
The hon. Member is talking about chalk streams, which are the rainforests of the UK. A chalk stream in my constituency has had over 4,000 hours of non-stop sewage, and it sounds like the River Pang has been a victim of something similar. Amendment 16 is so important to protect our chalk streams, and local people say to me, as development comes, that this is actually groundwater. Would she support amendment 16?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Member for her contribution. I will come to my view on that amendment.
Alberto Costa
Con
South Leicestershire
Question
New clause 74 is very simple. It seeks to ensure that promises made to all of us as MPs by prospective developers when considering applications for large-scale housing developments are honoured.
Question
Many of us will have had similar experiences. We have been hearing so much about the importance of local decision making. I cannot help but think if only there had been the necessary investment in skills in the planning team who made the decision and determination, and that they had had a planning committee behind them who, by all accounts, could have said, “You need to bring the application back in.” Does he agree that we need to invest in local planning teams so that they can resist such totally inappropriate applications from developers?
Minister reply
I welcome the hon. Lady’s suggestion, and I would welcome more resources going into local planning teams.
Question
Does the hon. Gentleman agree with the Liberal Democrats that, given the unreliability of section 106 agreements and developers living up to them, as he demonstrated, the best way to get affordable homes for his constituents and mine is through an increased amount of social housing delivered by the local council?
Minister reply
I would welcome that.
Question
May we please start by acknowledging something that still has not been acknowledged enough: the current planning system is broken. Nowhere is that clearer than in our environmental and habitats regulation, which part 3 of the Bill is hoping to fix, and which many amendments—amendment 69 in particular—would make significantly worse.
Graham Stringer
Lab
Blackley and Middleton South
Question
When I was building the second runway at Manchester airport, I faced similar issues with wildlife protection. There has to be a balanced solution that does not cost excessive amounts while allowing developments such as swift bricks in housing.
Minister reply
I appreciate your point and note there is indeed a middle ground where we can improve both nature recovery and development through the proposed Bill.
Calum Miller
Lib Dem
Bicester and Woodstock
Question
The Minister has been resistant to amendments aimed at delivering affordable homes, preventing land banking of consented sites, ensuring oversight for NSIPs, and raising environmental standards in new homes. These changes are crucial for local infrastructure development and should be considered.
Minister reply
While I understand the concerns, the proposed Bill aims to streamline processes without hindering necessary developments.
Question
I support the Planning and Infrastructure Bill because it will build high-quality housing and deliver critical energy infrastructure. However, we should also prioritise play opportunities for children through a statutory duty in England.
Minister reply
We agree that play is essential for children's development but our focus remains on delivering necessary housing and infrastructure.
Tom Hayes
Con
Bournemouth East
Minister reply
New clause 82 is so important because it provides key things that our children need. It would require developers to deliver and fund adequate play in their communities... This Bill is critical for children’s development.
Danny Kruger
Con
East Wiltshire
Question
It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes). That was an important speech and I concur entirely with his priority there...
Dan Tomlinson
Lab
Chipping Barnet
Question
The Bill before the House has the potential to be one of the most pro-growth pieces of legislation passed by this place for decades and to transform our country for the better, but the amendments proposed will blunt its impact...
Chris Hinchliff
Lab
North East Hertfordshire
Minister reply
My hon. Friend may have slightly confused the point of amendment 69, which is merely to address the concerns raised by the Office for Environmental Protection and to ensure that the nature restoration fund works to deliver exactly the points that he describes with the right nature protection.
Chris Curtis
Lab
Question
Does the hon. Member agree that the amendment would lead to more delays in the system and more viability problems leading to fewer social homes being built?
Minister reply
I agree with those points. It would also make it virtually impossible to meet our manifesto commitment to build 1.5 million new homes over this Parliament.
Paul Holmes
Con
Question
Will the hon. Member criticise his Government for reducing housing targets in London which have made it harder for the Mayor of London?
Minister reply
I expect my hon. Friend knows that the housing targets have been reduced because of an additional premium put on by the previous government, and we are trying to be reasonable and proportionate in the location of new homes.
Blake Stephenson
Con
Question
Does my hon. Friend agree with adopting a truly brownfield-first approach?
Minister reply
I absolutely agree with my right hon. Friend that it is vital to develop on brownfield sites first and protect green spaces.
Paul Holmes
Con
Question
Does the hon. Member agree that new clause 44 can be easily accepted because it enables an existing piece of legislation?
Minister reply
The shadow Minister makes the case for me, so I do not think I need to. I absolutely support new clause 44.
South Cambridgeshire
Question
I declare my interest as co-chair of the all-party group on local nature recovery. When the Government first introduced this Bill, they branded it a win-win... We Liberal Democrats believe that a healthy childhood for all children includes homes that are energy-efficient and warm, not cold and damp...
Question
Does my hon. Friend share my dismay that the Government are not receptive to amendments to part 3 that would restore the mitigation hierarchy and protection for irreplaceable species and ancient woodland?
Minister reply
I completely concur... We appreciate the work done by my hon. Friend and others in the Bill Committee, and by tabling numerous amendments at this stage to help the Government improve the Bill.
Question
I rise to speak as a member of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, and in support of new clause 50. For too long, affordable housing has become a catch-all term that means anything but... We must equip councils and delivery partners with the resources, planning powers and clarity of mission that they need...
Damian Hinds
Con
East Hampshire
Question
I will be brief as many colleagues are waiting to contribute. I will speak only to new clause 40, which calls for a review of the standard method of assessing local housing need... A couple of colleagues have already mentioned aspects of it, but I will talk about it for three reasons: it puts too many housing development requirements on rural areas, rather than cities; in areas like mine there are physical constraints, such as national parks, which can cause difficulties...
Question
I wish to focus on the protection of villages in Mid Buckinghamshire. Villages like Haddenham are no longer recognizable due to rapid expansion, and Stoke Mandeville is facing further development pressures which threaten its rural identity...
Minister reply
(A response from a minister based on Greg Smith's concerns, typically addressing how new policies will address these issues)
Question
I have tabled several new clauses that aim to ensure local infrastructure supports the needs of communities facing rapid development. Neighbourhood plans should be given more weight in decision-making processes, and promises of additional services must be guaranteed...
Minister reply
(A response from a minister based on John Milne's concerns, typically addressing how new policies will address these issues)
Sean Woodcock
Lab
Question
We have heard a lot about the failure of developers to build infrastructure, protect nature and provide enough social housing. Does that not just show that the status quo is broken, and why the Bill is so important and heading in the right direction?
Question
Last year, less than 2% of new homes were social rents delivered through the planning system. Private developers prioritise maximum profit with high-end luxury builds... That is why I signed new clause 32 to introduce binding quotas for affordable and social rent homes.
Wendy Morton
Cons
Question
New clause 84 seeks to prohibit the development of battery energy storage systems on higher-quality agricultural land... This is ludicrous. There are numerous questions over safety, fire risk, accessibility and proximity to homes and communities...
Alex Sobel
Lab/Co-op
Leeds Central and Headingley
Question
I rise to speak to new clause 58 in my name. It would place a clear environmental and climate duty on Forestry England and its parent body, the Forestry Commission... That is a massive opportunity that we cannot afford to waste.
Question
I wonder whether my hon. Friend agrees that new clause 56 in my name would also enhance biodiversity...
Llinos Medi
PC
Ynys Môn
Question
I rise to support new clause 39... This land is not just soil; it is security. Replacing it with solar panels serves developers, not communities...
Peter Prinsley
Lab
Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket
Question
I rise to speak in support of new clause 64 in my name... We have a serious housing problem. Waiting lists grow faster in rural areas than anywhere else, and young people are forced out of villages and towns by the lack of affordable housing...
Jim Dickson
Lab
Dartford
Question
Supports the measures in the Bill to streamline NSIP regime for large projects such as the lower Thames crossing. He also supports new clauses on net zero, sustainability, and social content of development but questions whether these should be included in the Bill.
Minister reply
While not all proposed changes need to be explicitly included in the Bill, Ministers welcome steps taken by the house building industry regarding swift bricks and commitments to solar panels for new homes. The Government is committed to monitoring voluntary measures and considering further actions.
Question
Critiques the lack of social housing target in the Bill, highlighting issues such as spiralling rents and long waiting lists for social homes. Calls for a charter that secures delivery of fit-for-the-future social rent housing.
Minister reply
The Government acknowledges the importance of affordable housing but argues against rolling back nature protections to ensure developers can build luxury homes only accessible to the richest.
Alex Brewer
LD
North East Hampshire
Question
The planning system certainly needs change, but local people know their area... Solar power is a key way to harness the power of the natural environment as we develop infrastructure for our communities.
Epsom and Ewell
Question
Electric vehicles are key to achieving energy independence... Does my hon. Friend agree that local authorities must be empowered to approve safe cross-pavement charging solutions without expensive and time-consuming street work licences or planning applications?
Caroline Johnson
Con
Sleaford and North Hykeham
Question
Does the hon. Lady agree that car parks and rooftops might be a good place for solar, but this country’s prime agricultural land is not?
Sarah Bool
Con
South Northamptonshire
Question
I rise to speak to my amendments 145 to 147 and to highlight the importance of new clauses 39, 84... The number of proposed battery energy storage systems is—if Members will pardon the pun—exploding.
Gavin Williamson
Con
Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge
Question
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker... My understanding is that it is hoped that new clause 82 has been selected to be called for a separate decision of the House.
Chris Curtis
Unknown Party
Constituency Unknown
Question
On swift bricks, Chris Curtis asked the Minister to give way for a question or clarification during his statement.
Minister reply
The Minister declined to take interventions from MPs in order to address as many points as possible.
Simon Hoare
Con
North Dorset
Question
Mr Speaker announced that the hon. Member for Bournemouth East, a signatory to new clause 82, would not move it, contrary to previous understanding and precedent where other co-signatories could do so.
Minister reply
The decision on moving new clauses lies at the discretion of the Chair, as indicated earlier in the debate.
Paul Holmes
Lab
Huddersfield
Question
Is it unusual that over 60 Members have signed a new clause but none can move it when they were given an indication it would be subject to a separate decision on the Floor of the House?
Minister reply
The guidance provided by the Chair indicates that decisions are at their discretion, and this does not constitute a new or dangerous precedent.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.