Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

177379

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Department for Communities and Local Government: Written Questions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to provide a substantive answer to Question 220922, tabled on 15 January 2015 by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223133
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/02/2015 answer text <p>Question UIN 220922 was answered on 5 February 2015.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 09/02/2015 17:15:56 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177380

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Planning Obligations
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential effect on future supply of affordable housing in rural areas of changes introduced to section 106 requirements for sites of 10 units or less.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223175
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department for Communities and Local Government carried out a public consultation in March 2014 to invite views and local evidence on proposed changes to national policy on section 106 affordable housing and tariff contributions. All evidence submitted was carefully considered.</p><p> </p><p>As a consequence of the consultation, we amended our proposals to introduce a lower threshold of 5 units for rural areas, as outlined in my Written Ministerial Statement of 28 November 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 55WS. Rural exception sites are also exempted.</p><p> </p><p>I can confirm that we have also undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment, which I will arrange to be placed in the Library of the House. We do not consider our reforms will have a negative impact on discrimination, fostering good relations or advancing equality of opportunity.</p><p> </p><p>We estimate that the policy will save, on average, £15,000 in Section 106 housing contributions per new dwelling in England—some councils are charging up to £145,000 on single dwellings. Further savings will be made from scaling back Section 106 tariffs, which may add additional charges of more than £15,000 per dwelling, over and above any housing contributions. Taken together, these reforms will deliver six-figure savings for small-scale developers in some parts of the country.</p><p> </p><p>We do not believe that our reforms will have any significant adverse effect on our affordable housing programme. We have so far delivered 217,000 new affordable homes since 2010, and are bringing in £19.5 billion of public and private in affordable housing over the current Spending Review period. In the next Parliament, we are on track to deliver a further 275,000 new affordable homes, backed up by £38 billion of public and private investment.</p><p> </p><p>The Home Builders Federation has confirmed that these changes will provide a boost to small and medium builders, stating: “This exemption would offer small and medium-sized developers a shot in the arm. The time and expense of negotiating Section 106 affordable housing contributions on small sites, and the subsequent payments, can threaten the viability of small developments and act as another barrier to the entry and growth of smaller firms”</p><p> </p><p>Similarly, the Federation of Master Builders has said: “The new ten unit threshold for affordable housing contributions is a sensible and proportionate approach to help alleviate the pressure on SME house builders who have been squeezed out of the housing market in recent years. This is important because without a viable SME house building sector we won’t be able to build the number of new homes that are needed to address the housing crisis”.</p><p> </p><p>We also listened to representations from the hon. (Labour) Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) who has campaigned vigorously against such levies. Indeed, I would observe that under the majority of the last Labour Government, the national threshold (as stated in PPG3) was actually 15 units.</p><p> </p><p>Loading stealth taxes on new housing just makes housing less affordable and cuts house building. Unrealistic Section 106 charges result in no development, no regeneration and no community benefits: reducing them can result in more housing and more affordable housing. Our reforms will help unblock small stalled sites and provide a boost to self-builders and small house builders.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 12/02/2015 17:08:27 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43612 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177381

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Planning Obligations
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether his Department undertook an impact assessment of changes to section 106 requirements for sites of 10 units or less.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223176
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department for Communities and Local Government carried out a public consultation in March 2014 to invite views and local evidence on proposed changes to national policy on section 106 affordable housing and tariff contributions. All evidence submitted was carefully considered.</p><p> </p><p>As a consequence of the consultation, we amended our proposals to introduce a lower threshold of 5 units for rural areas, as outlined in my Written Ministerial Statement of 28 November 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 55WS. Rural exception sites are also exempted.</p><p> </p><p>I can confirm that we have also undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment, which I will arrange to be placed in the Library of the House. We do not consider our reforms will have a negative impact on discrimination, fostering good relations or advancing equality of opportunity.</p><p> </p><p>We estimate that the policy will save, on average, £15,000 in Section 106 housing contributions per new dwelling in England—some councils are charging up to £145,000 on single dwellings. Further savings will be made from scaling back Section 106 tariffs, which may add additional charges of more than £15,000 per dwelling, over and above any housing contributions. Taken together, these reforms will deliver six-figure savings for small-scale developers in some parts of the country.</p><p> </p><p>We do not believe that our reforms will have any significant adverse effect on our affordable housing programme. We have so far delivered 217,000 new affordable homes since 2010, and are bringing in £19.5 billion of public and private in affordable housing over the current Spending Review period. In the next Parliament, we are on track to deliver a further 275,000 new affordable homes, backed up by £38 billion of public and private investment.</p><p> </p><p>The Home Builders Federation has confirmed that these changes will provide a boost to small and medium builders, stating: “This exemption would offer small and medium-sized developers a shot in the arm. The time and expense of negotiating Section 106 affordable housing contributions on small sites, and the subsequent payments, can threaten the viability of small developments and act as another barrier to the entry and growth of smaller firms”</p><p> </p><p>Similarly, the Federation of Master Builders has said: “The new ten unit threshold for affordable housing contributions is a sensible and proportionate approach to help alleviate the pressure on SME house builders who have been squeezed out of the housing market in recent years. This is important because without a viable SME house building sector we won’t be able to build the number of new homes that are needed to address the housing crisis”.</p><p> </p><p>We also listened to representations from the hon. (Labour) Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) who has campaigned vigorously against such levies. Indeed, I would observe that under the majority of the last Labour Government, the national threshold (as stated in PPG3) was actually 15 units.</p><p> </p><p>Loading stealth taxes on new housing just makes housing less affordable and cuts house building. Unrealistic Section 106 charges result in no development, no regeneration and no community benefits: reducing them can result in more housing and more affordable housing. Our reforms will help unblock small stalled sites and provide a boost to self-builders and small house builders.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 12/02/2015 17:08:26 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43614 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177382

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Department for Communities and Local Government: Written Questions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to provide a substantive answer to Question 220920, tabled on 15 January 2015 by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223134
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/02/2015 answer text <p>Questions 220918, 220919, 220920 and 220921 were answered today, 24 February 2015.</p> answering member constituency Bristol West answering member printed Stephen Williams grouped question UIN 223135 223136 223137 question first answered 24/02/2015 17:02:47 answering member 1492 label Biography information for Stephen Williams
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177385

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Department for Communities and Local Government: Written Questions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to answer Question 220918, tabled on 15 January 2015 by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223136
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/02/2015 answer text <p>Questions 220918, 220919, 220920 and 220921 were answered today, 24 February 2015.</p> answering member constituency Bristol West answering member printed Stephen Williams grouped question UIN 223134 223135 223137 question first answered 24/02/2015 17:02:48 answering member 1492 label Biography information for Stephen Williams
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177386

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Department for Communities and Local Government: Written Questions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to answer Question 220919, tabled on 15 January 2015 by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223137
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/02/2015 answer text <p>Questions 220918, 220919, 220920 and 220921 were answered today, 24 February 2015.</p> answering member constituency Bristol West answering member printed Stephen Williams grouped question UIN 223134 223135 223136 question first answered 24/02/2015 17:02:48 answering member 1492 label Biography information for Stephen Williams
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177387

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Department for Communities and Local Government: Written Questions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to answer Question 220921, tabled on 15 January 2015 by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223135
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/02/2015 answer text <p>Questions 220918, 220919, 220920 and 220921 were answered today, 24 February 2015.</p> answering member constituency Bristol West answering member printed Stephen Williams grouped question UIN 223134 223136 223137 question first answered 24/02/2015 17:02:47 answering member 1492 label Biography information for Stephen Williams
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177389

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Planning Obligations
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether his Department undertook an impact assessment of the introduction of the financial credit for vacant buildings.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223172
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department for Communities and Local Government carried out a public consultation in March 2014 to invite views and local evidence on proposed changes to national policy on the issue of Section 106 tariffs being imposed on empty buildings being brought back into use. All evidence submitted was carefully considered. The new policy was outlined in my Written Ministerial Statement of 28 November 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 55WS. The purpose of the credit is to provide an incentive that will help regenerate empty and redundant buildings.</p><p>I can confirm that we have also undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment, which I will arrange to be placed in the Library. We do not consider our reforms will have a negative impact on discrimination, fostering good relations or advancing equality of opportunity.</p><p>We do not believe that our reforms will have any significant adverse effect on our affordable housing programme. We have so far delivered 217,000 new affordable homes since 2010, and are bringing in £19.5 billion of public and private in affordable housing over the current Spending Review period. In the next Parliament, we are on track to deliver a further 275,000 new affordable homes, backed up by £38 billion of public and private investment.</p><p>Planning guidance is kept under review and is updated as required, and we are open to representations on any practical areas where further assistance is needed to help facilitate the implementation of new policy.</p><p>I would note:</p><p> </p><p>· The policy changes are aimed at providing a clear incentive for brownfield regeneration, whilst supporting the Government’s policies of protecting the Green Belt and increasing housing supply.</p><p> </p><p>· The relief is intended to reflect the often higher costs of conversion and refurbishment and bringing an existing building back into use. Our reforms will help increase development and regeneration, providing more homes at no cost to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p>· Such re-use of existing buildings has a limited impact on local infrastructure; however, any increase in floor space would still be liable for Section 106 tariffs.</p><p> </p><p>· The Government had already amended regulations for the Community Infrastructure Levy which extend an existing credit for vacant buildings being brought back into use from the levy. This applies either where buildings are brought back into the same use, or for a change of use provided they have not been “abandoned” and have been in use for at least six months in the last three years. In either case the levy is only charged on any increase in floor space. Our Section 106 reforms mirror those Community Infrastructure Levy reforms: this is a consistent, joined-up approach.</p><p>Our new policy was endorsed in the consultation by the likes of the Federation of Small Businesses, the Home Builders Federation, the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the British Property Federation. They said that the proposed policy would encourage the refurbishment and regeneration of brownfield sites and bring vacant buildings back into use, especially given the higher costs of building on previously developed land.</p><p>It is crazy to be putting stealth taxes on empty and redundant buildings being brought back into productive use, as it hinders regeneration and discourages new housing being created from conversions. I would note to the rt. hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood that one of the reasons why London house prices are so high is all the levies and charges placed on them. If the state puts heavy taxes on new housing, prices will rise and supply will fall; conversely, our reforms will help lower housing costs and increase housing supply.</p><p>Reflecting commitments made in the Coalition Agreement, getting empty and redundant buildings back into use is a key priority for this Government. Under the Coalition Government, the number of empty homes in England has so far fallen to a 10 year low. Our reforms will further support the conversion of empty buildings, and so deliver an economic, social and environmental benefit to society.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis grouped question UIN 223173 223583 223584 223585 question first answered 12/02/2015 17:38:32 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43601 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177390

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Planning Obligations
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential effect on future supply of affordable housing of the introduction of the financial credit for vacant buildings.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223173
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department for Communities and Local Government carried out a public consultation in March 2014 to invite views and local evidence on proposed changes to national policy on the issue of Section 106 tariffs being imposed on empty buildings being brought back into use. All evidence submitted was carefully considered. The new policy was outlined in my Written Ministerial Statement of 28 November 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 55WS. The purpose of the credit is to provide an incentive that will help regenerate empty and redundant buildings.</p><p>I can confirm that we have also undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment, which I will arrange to be placed in the Library. We do not consider our reforms will have a negative impact on discrimination, fostering good relations or advancing equality of opportunity.</p><p>We do not believe that our reforms will have any significant adverse effect on our affordable housing programme. We have so far delivered 217,000 new affordable homes since 2010, and are bringing in £19.5 billion of public and private in affordable housing over the current Spending Review period. In the next Parliament, we are on track to deliver a further 275,000 new affordable homes, backed up by £38 billion of public and private investment.</p><p>Planning guidance is kept under review and is updated as required, and we are open to representations on any practical areas where further assistance is needed to help facilitate the implementation of new policy.</p><p>I would note:</p><p> </p><p>· The policy changes are aimed at providing a clear incentive for brownfield regeneration, whilst supporting the Government’s policies of protecting the Green Belt and increasing housing supply.</p><p> </p><p>· The relief is intended to reflect the often higher costs of conversion and refurbishment and bringing an existing building back into use. Our reforms will help increase development and regeneration, providing more homes at no cost to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p>· Such re-use of existing buildings has a limited impact on local infrastructure; however, any increase in floor space would still be liable for Section 106 tariffs.</p><p> </p><p>· The Government had already amended regulations for the Community Infrastructure Levy which extend an existing credit for vacant buildings being brought back into use from the levy. This applies either where buildings are brought back into the same use, or for a change of use provided they have not been “abandoned” and have been in use for at least six months in the last three years. In either case the levy is only charged on any increase in floor space. Our Section 106 reforms mirror those Community Infrastructure Levy reforms: this is a consistent, joined-up approach.</p><p>Our new policy was endorsed in the consultation by the likes of the Federation of Small Businesses, the Home Builders Federation, the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the British Property Federation. They said that the proposed policy would encourage the refurbishment and regeneration of brownfield sites and bring vacant buildings back into use, especially given the higher costs of building on previously developed land.</p><p>It is crazy to be putting stealth taxes on empty and redundant buildings being brought back into productive use, as it hinders regeneration and discourages new housing being created from conversions. I would note to the rt. hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood that one of the reasons why London house prices are so high is all the levies and charges placed on them. If the state puts heavy taxes on new housing, prices will rise and supply will fall; conversely, our reforms will help lower housing costs and increase housing supply.</p><p>Reflecting commitments made in the Coalition Agreement, getting empty and redundant buildings back into use is a key priority for this Government. Under the Coalition Government, the number of empty homes in England has so far fallen to a 10 year low. Our reforms will further support the conversion of empty buildings, and so deliver an economic, social and environmental benefit to society.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis grouped question UIN 223172 223583 223584 223585 question first answered 12/02/2015 17:38:32 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43607 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds

177391

registered interest
date	03/02/2015
answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Planning Obligations
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential effect on future supply of affordable housing of changes introduced to section 106 requirements for sites of 10 units or less.
tabling member constituency	Wolverhampton North East
tabling member printed	Emma Reynolds
uin	223174
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department for Communities and Local Government carried out a public consultation in March 2014 to invite views and local evidence on proposed changes to national policy on section 106 affordable housing and tariff contributions. All evidence submitted was carefully considered.</p><p> </p><p>As a consequence of the consultation, we amended our proposals to introduce a lower threshold of 5 units for rural areas, as outlined in my Written Ministerial Statement of 28 November 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 55WS. Rural exception sites are also exempted.</p><p> </p><p>I can confirm that we have also undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment, which I will arrange to be placed in the Library of the House. We do not consider our reforms will have a negative impact on discrimination, fostering good relations or advancing equality of opportunity.</p><p> </p><p>We estimate that the policy will save, on average, £15,000 in Section 106 housing contributions per new dwelling in England—some councils are charging up to £145,000 on single dwellings. Further savings will be made from scaling back Section 106 tariffs, which may add additional charges of more than £15,000 per dwelling, over and above any housing contributions. Taken together, these reforms will deliver six-figure savings for small-scale developers in some parts of the country.</p><p> </p><p>We do not believe that our reforms will have any significant adverse effect on our affordable housing programme. We have so far delivered 217,000 new affordable homes since 2010, and are bringing in £19.5 billion of public and private in affordable housing over the current Spending Review period. In the next Parliament, we are on track to deliver a further 275,000 new affordable homes, backed up by £38 billion of public and private investment.</p><p> </p><p>The Home Builders Federation has confirmed that these changes will provide a boost to small and medium builders, stating: “This exemption would offer small and medium-sized developers a shot in the arm. The time and expense of negotiating Section 106 affordable housing contributions on small sites, and the subsequent payments, can threaten the viability of small developments and act as another barrier to the entry and growth of smaller firms”</p><p> </p><p>Similarly, the Federation of Master Builders has said: “The new ten unit threshold for affordable housing contributions is a sensible and proportionate approach to help alleviate the pressure on SME house builders who have been squeezed out of the housing market in recent years. This is important because without a viable SME house building sector we won’t be able to build the number of new homes that are needed to address the housing crisis”.</p><p> </p><p>We also listened to representations from the hon. (Labour) Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) who has campaigned vigorously against such levies. Indeed, I would observe that under the majority of the last Labour Government, the national threshold (as stated in PPG3) was actually 15 units.</p><p> </p><p>Loading stealth taxes on new housing just makes housing less affordable and cuts house building. Unrealistic Section 106 charges result in no development, no regeneration and no community benefits: reducing them can result in more housing and more affordable housing. Our reforms will help unblock small stalled sites and provide a boost to self-builders and small house builders.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 12/02/2015 17:08:26 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43611 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4077 label Biography information for Emma Reynolds