It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dame Siobhain. I formally congratulate you on your honour—I have not had the chance to do so yet. I congratulate the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake) on securing this important debate and thank him for the characteristic clarity with which he made his case. I also thank the hon. Members for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine), for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) and for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas), and my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Hallam (Olivia Blake) and for Rugby (John Slinger) for their contributions. Lastly, I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds), for his thoughtful remarks, and warmly welcome him to his place. I will certainly take away the specific points that he raised. More widely, I look forward to working with him, as he said, on a constructive basis wherever possible. I must make it clear at the outset that, while I noted the specific case that the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton raised—and indeed other cases that have been raised today—I hope that hon. Members will appreciate that I am unable to comment on individual plans or applications due to the quasi-judicial nature of the planning process and the potential decision-making role of the Deputy Prime Minister. I therefore propose to make some general comments about national planning policy as it relates to Traveller sites and specifically the role of local planning authorities, including in respect of enforcement, within that national framework, thereby addressing many of the points that have been raised today, while recognising that this is an incredibly complex area of policy and law, particularly as it relates to individual cases. The Government's approach to Traveller site provision is set out in the planning policy for Traveller sites policy paper, which should be read in conjunction with the national planning policy framework and has the same policy status as it. Local planning authorities are responsible for setting pitch targets for Gypsies and Travellers to address their accommodation needs within their area. The right to respect for private and family life under the European convention on human rights, and in relation to the rights of the child, under the Children Act 1989 and the UN convention on the rights of the child, are often engaged in Gypsy and Traveller developments. However, such considerations can be addressed by planning adequately for Traveller pitches through the local plan process. Local plans across the country need to come forward in short order to achieve universal coverage as they shape developments in their areas. The Government is consulting on a range of policy changes to ensure that our planning system supports the right development in the right places and delivers on the Government's growth agenda, including changes to green-belt policy to enable targeted release of low-quality grey-belt land for unmet housing and other development needs. These proposals aim to address unmet need for Traveller sites while not compromising environmental objectives or undermining the overall function and purpose of the green belt. We will finalise our position after considering consultation responses and following targeted engagement with key stakeholders, including specialist planning consultants, charities representing the interests of the Traveller community, and professionals working in this space. The Government is responsible for setting the legislative and policy framework within which the planning system operates, but it is for local planning authorities to prepare local development plans and make decisions based on adopted plans unless material considerations indicate otherwise. When it comes to enforcement more generally, local planning authorities have a wide range of powers with strong penalties for non-compliance, strengthened by reforms introduced in the 2023 Act. These powers include longer time limits for enforcement action and addressing a loophole with retrospective development so that there is only one opportunity to appeal. Ultimately, it is for individual local planning authorities to determine what weight they should afford to relevant considerations based on the circumstances of each case.