Neighbourhood Planning Bill — New Clause 9 — Requirement for Planning Permission for the Demolition or Change of Use of Drinking Establishments — 13 Dec 2016 at 19:30

Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset voted against making the demolition or change of use of pubs or other drinking establishments subject to planning permission.

The majority of MPs voted against making the demolition or change of use of pubs or other drinking establishments subject to planning permission.

MPs were considering the Neighbourhood Planning Bill[1]

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: Permitted development: use clauses and demolition of drinking establishments and stated:

  • “(1) The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (SI/1987/764) is amended as follows.
  • (2) At the end of section 3(6) insert—
  • “(p) drinking establishment.”
  • (3) In the Schedule, leave out the paragraph starting “Class A4. Drinking Establishments”
  • (4) The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (SI1995/418) is amended as follows.
  • (5) In Part 3 of Schedule 2—
  • (a) in Class A: Permitted development, leave out “A4 (drinking establishments)”.
  • (b) In Class AA: Permitted development, leave out “Class A4 (drinking establishments)”.
  • (c) in Class C: Permitted development, leave out “Class A4 (drinking establishments)”.
  • (6) In Part 31 of Schedule 2 under A.1 at end insert—
  • “() the building subject to demolition is classed as a drinking establishment”.”

The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following explanatory note:

  • The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that any proposed demolition of or change of use to public houses and other drinking establishments would be subject to planning permission. Currently such buildings, unless they have been listed as Assets of Community Value with the local authority, can be demolished or have their use changed without such permission being granted.

==

Debate in Parliament |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con266 (+2 tell) 4082.7%
DUP6 1087.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 151 (+2 tell)065.9%
LDem0 2022.2%
SDLP0 2066.7%
UUP2 00100.0%
Total:274 161075.2%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
Peter BottomleyWorthing WestCon (front bench)aye
Philip HolloboneKetteringCon (front bench)aye
Greg KnightEast YorkshireConaye
Tania MathiasTwickenhamCon (front bench)aye
Jim ShannonStrangfordDUP (front bench)aye

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive