Andy Slaughter, Labour MP for Hammersmith Shadow Minister for Justice House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA 020

7219 6052

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government National Planning Casework Unit 5 St Philips Place Colmore Row Birmingham B3 2PW 27th March 2013, Dear Sir, Re: London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (Shepherds Bush Market Area) Compulsory Purchase Order 2013 I am writing to object to the above compulsory purchase order (CPO). I am the Member of Parliament for Hammersmith and my comments reflect those of many of my constituents, as well as my own opinions on the matter. I believe that the use of compulsory purchase powers is inappropriate in this case for the following reasons: 1) The purpose for which the CPO is being made is itself subject to legal challenge. The Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) pertaining to this land has been the subject of Judicial Review, (R on the application of Abdul Wakil (T/A Orya Textiles) v Hammersmith & Fulham LBC and Orion Shepherds Bush Ltd (2012) EWHC 1411 (QB)). Wilkie J gave judgement for the applicant, quashing the SPD. A further application for Judicial Review will be heard later this year, in which the applicants will apply to quash the planning application for the site. With both the planning policy for the area and the specific application on which the CPO will bite being legally in doubt the application for CPO is at the least premature.

2) Hammersmith & Fulham LBC (the council) has failed to demonstrate that the funding said to be relied on is adequate and/or that it will be available at the appropriate time, having regard to the present and reasonably foreseeable economic conditions and the duration of the implementation of the scheme underlying the CPO. 3) The council has also failed to demonstrate that the parties to the Cost Indemnity Agreement said to be relied upon in paragraph 10.2 of the Statement of Reasons are parties with sufficient resources to ensure that the scheme underlying the CPO can and will be implemented in the present and reasonably foreseeable economic conditions. In particular, the council has failed to show that Orion Shepherds Bush Limited has sufficient resources to

ensure that the scheme underlying the CPO can and will be implemented. The prior history of the parent developer, Orion Land and Leisure, also raises doubts about its ability to see the project through to completion. 4) The owners and tenants of the existing shops and other businesses have not had meaningful negotiations conducted in good faith with either the council or the developer, so the council has not demonstrated that its attempt to use compulsory purchase powers is reasonable or justified. 5) The council has not shown that there is a reasonable expectation that the scheme underlying the CPO will proceed within the period of validity of the CPO, should it be granted as currently applied for. 6) According to the council, the primary purpose of the scheme for which the CPO is being contemplated is to secure the continuity, character and viability of the existing market. The relevant provisions of the s106 agreement and the undertakings given therein, do not adequately ensure this. It is perverse to use CPO powers to acquire ownership of land already used for the same purpose which the CPO seeks to impose.

For the above reasons, I believe that whatever view one holds about the underlying scheme itself, this attempt to use compulsory purchase powers is misconceived. Firstly, by reason of its timing it is premature, and should not be under consideration before the legality or otherwise of the underlying scheme is established. Secondly, there is no sound financial basis to the scheme proposed. Indeed it may be that recourse to CPO is a reflection of the stalled nature of the scheme and the councils wish to assist a struggling developer with which it has had a close relationship from the outset. Thirdly, even if the scheme is ultimately declared lawful and allowed to proceed, the notion that a council should be able to wrest land from parties against their express will and without meaningful discussion, only to return it later in what the council regards as an improved state flies in the face of the reason CPO powers are available, ie to allow council to acquire land where there is a compelling case in the public interest. The council has not demonstrated this, nor has it demonstrated adequate attempt to acquire by negotiation and agreement . I therefore add my voice to the voices of many of the Shepherds Bush Market traders, the owners of the shops at nos 30-52 Goldhawk Road as well as many other of my constituents with an interest in the matter, in asking you not to agree to the CPO as proposed.. Yours sincerely, Andy Slaughter MP for Hammersmith