Size does matter, as the Government’s larger-than-life Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government was told several times in the House of Commons.

Eric Pickles was attacked from all sides of the House over Article Four of the Growth and Infrastructure Bill, the controversial proposal to allow people to build substantial home extensions and conservatories without getting local authority planning permission.

Under the proposals drawn up by the Government, homeowners with detached houses would be able to add on a single-storey extension of up to 26ft without planning permission. Homeowners with other types of house would be able to extend up to 19ft. This would run for three years.

The Government’s idea is that cutting red tape and allowing bigger extensions will contribute to the regeneration of the economy. Although the proposal was accepted 286 votes to 259, Conservative and Liberal-Democrat backbench MPs joined with Labour to voice their opposition Sixteen Conservative MPs and eight Liberal-Democrat MPs voted against the Government. Bradford East Liberal-Democrat MP David Ward was one of them.

He said: “In terms of the Government line, which Pickles was there to defend, it was torn apart by arguments from all sides of the House.

“He was wanting to give councils local discretion to say yes or no under Article Four. People already have the right to build up to 4m for detached houses and 3m for semi-detached houses without planning permission – although building regulations apply, you can’t just put up a shack.

“Ninety per cent of planning applications, after due consideration, go through on the nod. Ten per cent are contentious.

“What Eric Pickles is suggesting is that they should be allowed through. This might be okay if you live in leafy Surrey with a substantial garden and space between houses.

“But Bradford, in many places, is congested. A free-for-all would have a severe impact on neighbours.”

Environmental consultant Steve Maslen, who works for the Saltaire-based consultancy JBA, said he thought the Government would not be able to deliver what they want.

“Anybody wanting to build an extension of that size is going to be involved in regulatory approval anyway because of building regulations. You have to get someone to do the drawings, so getting planning permission isn’t going to add much to it, perhaps a few hundred pounds.You can get approval through quite easily even in sensitive areas.

“The bette noir for the Government is red tape. But I don’t think people will take up the proposal because mortgage lenders would be concerned if they saw growth on your house without necessary planning approval.

“It’s ill-conceived. You’d get all sorts of oddly-shaped, oddly-rendered things turning up. Planners have to make sure where windows are going to be placed to make sure that private amenities aren’t going to be effected by big extensions.”

Next week, the Growth and Infrastructure Bill with its contentious Article Four goes back to the House of Lords for further deliberation.

Eric Pickles, reportedly distressed by MPs’ concerns, said that “even at this late hour we can actually establish a broad consensus”.

David Ward believes this means a compromise of some kind. But what? Eric Pickles, by far and away the cleverest politician when he was leader of Bradford Council between 1988-90, needs a window of opportunity.

“The only thing that would be acceptable to the House would be if local authorities had discretion on the matter,” Mr Ward added.

According to one national parliamentary sketch-writer, when one Tory rebel likened local government to a curate’s egg – good in parts – Pickles replied that, on the contrary, it was “an omelette of happiness and consensus”.

Shipley Conservative MP Philip Davies chaired the committee stage of the Growth and Infrastructure Bill, so under House of Commons rules was not allowed to participate in the debate and vote on the Pickles proposal.

Nevertheless, he said: “I am in favour of scrapping unnecessary bureaucracy that doesn’t serve any useful purpose and saves the public extra expense; but also, I want to preserve our villages and local communities and to make sure that any development is sympathetic.

“It’s about striking the right balance. It’s difficult for the Government to find it.”

On this matter they appear to be in a bit of a pickle.