I thank the Minister for his comments about Grenfell. Yesterday marked the ninth anniversary of the Grenfell Tower fire—a day for remembrance and sombre reflection. My thoughts are with the survivors, bereaved families and all those affected by this tragedy. Can he provide an update on what actions have been taken so far to implement the recommendations from the inquiry?

I welcome the legislation that the Government have introduced to lower the voting age to 16, and to make it easier for people to register to vote, but has he considered the benefits for increased participation in elections of adding a “none of the above” option on all ballot papers? This change could be made without primary legislation.

May I echo the words of the Secretary of State, nine years on from the terrible fire at Grenfell? It is incredibly important that we learn the lessons from that tragedy and ensure that people are protected in their home. Labour says that 16 and 17-year-olds are mature enough to vote, but in a written answer to me, it also says that 16 and 17-year-olds are not mature enough to serve on juries, because that is “an adult duty”. It says that 16 and 17-year-olds should vote, but should not play on their phone after the Government-defined bedtime of 8.30 in the evening. These are just two examples from the list of inconsistencies triggered by Labour's “votes at 16” policy. The only consistent thing about that policy is the blatant party political self-interest, isn't it?

Travellers built an unauthorised development in Willows Green in my constituency over a bank holiday weekend. I wrote to the Secretary of State about this, and his reply amounted to little more than a hand-wringing word salad. If he is serious about ending the abuse of retrospective planning in Essex and elsewhere, why will he not take up the proposals that we have put forward and end the “build first and apply later” culture?

New towns such as Tempsford should offer an opportunity to ease development pressures, not add to them, so I thank the Minister for listening to my representations, and ensuring that if Tempsford comes forward, it will be included in Central Bedfordshire council's housing target, rather than being in addition to it. Across Central Beds, lots of developments have come forward without the right infrastructure. As we explore the vehicles required to bring forward new towns such as Tempsford, how can we ensure that we do everything possible to get infrastructure right from the outset?

The Government's proposed high-value council tax surcharge will be collected by councils but retained by the Treasury. If councils neither control the charge nor keep the revenue, why is it being called a council tax? Will the Minister commit to changing this misleading policy title? Given that most of the revenue from the surcharge will be raised in London, will the Government ensure that a fair proportion is reinvested in the capital?

The MP noted the Department's release of new guidance for local authorities on family hubs and asked what measures the Department might consider to foster networking and best practice across local authorities. He also requested a meeting with the Minister to discuss how his all-party parliamentary group on family hubs could help deliver this culture change.

The MP asked if the Minister agrees that it must be made easier for communities to tackle eyesore buildings by imposing harsher measures on offending landlords and strengthening local authority measures to bring them back into use. She requested clarification on FSAs receiving the power to use an overnight visitor levy as proposed in the King's Speech.

The MP noted the proposal in the King's Speech for an overnight visitor levy and asked if FSAs will also receive the power to use the levy. She requested a meeting with the Minister and Treasury officials to discuss this.

The MP asked the Minister to set out what new infrastructure the development corporation will be responsible for delivering and by when it will deliver this infrastructure.

The MP expressed concern about mass eviction of his elderly constituents and requested support from the Minister to prevent rural communities being victimised by these practices. He asked for a meeting to discuss this issue further.

The MP asked if the Secretary of State had met South East Water or Canterbury city council to discuss issues with water supply and demand. She requested clarification on measures taken by stakeholders to address this issue.

The MP asked what steps the Minister will take to ensure that the Building Safety Regulator functions effectively and does not create greater risk through significant delays.

The MP asked if the Secretary of State would help her win the Chancellor's support for a dedicated “buy the supply” fund for councils to acquire new council housing.

Can the Minister tell me what steps we can take through the next iteration of the national planning policy framework to ensure that the aforementioned benefits are not undermined when infrastructure projects must be progressed?

Will the Secretary of State step in and reverse this awful planning policy decision which is a complete affront to local democracy?

What steps is the Minister taking to speed up high street regeneration by bringing empty shops back into use, and will he visit Dudley town high street?

How will the Minister stop developers using viability assessments to wriggle out of providing affordable homes for communities such as mine?

How can we look at existing funding criteria for mid-rise buildings and encourage Homes England to fully support leaseholders in taking on well-resourced developers?

How can it be justified for a unitary authority to be formed that rips the waterside away from the New Forest?

Will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss how we can fix that despite the council?

Will the Government back the campaign to ensure that Eastbourne pier continues to stand strong?

Does he share my concern that that would undermine devolution before it even started?

Further to the Minister's answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), will he take the opportunity of the new NPPF to make it absolutely clear that if someone wilfully ignores—not inadvertently, but deliberately and wilfully—the need for planning consent, they will not subsequently get retrospective permission?

Last week we held interviews for the chair of our Pride in Place neighbourhood board in Redditch. Will the Minister join me in thanking all those who put their name forward and encourage all residents in Greenlands and Woodrow to take part in the scheme, which will see the largest single financial investment in my town in my entire lifetime?

Will the Minister for Housing and Planning review the 2,500 square metre threshold for edge of town centre and out of town centre planning applications and conduct an assessment of their impact on the high street, particularly through the lens of supermarkets setting up things like key cutting and shoe repair kiosks, which decimate our high streets, as has recently happened in Princes Risborough?