1. The Government is expected to publish its Planning White Paper on Wednesday 16 May, next week. CPRE will be analysising the White Paper as quickly as possible and will be available for comment on that day.

2. Despite having revamped the planning system in 2004 with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, the White Paper is expected to propose further sweeping changes to the planning system. The Government’s primary concern appears to be that there is a bias within the current planning system towards sustainability and environmental protection, with insufficient weight being given to economic development. This was the thinking behind Kate Barker’s recent Review of Land Use Planning. CPRE is deeply concerned that the Planning White Paper will have a strong economic bias which could undermine the delivery of sustainable development and frustrate public involvement in the planning process.

Background

3. In December 2005, the Chancellor and the Deputy Prime Minister commissioned Kate Barker ‘to consider how … planning policy and procedures can better deliver economic growth and prosperity …’. The Barker Review of Land Use Planning Final Report – Recommendations was published in December 2006. The Barker Review of planning ran in parallel with Sir Nicholas Stern’s review of the economics of climate change and Sir Rod Eddington’s review of transport. All three reports have a strong economic focus and are likely to be major influences over policy in their respective fields for years to come, especially as Gordon Brown, who co-commissioned all three, is set to be our next Prime Minister.

4. The Planning White Paper is likely to address a wide range of contentious issues. It comes on the eve of the sixtieth anniversary of the original Town and Country Planning Act 1947. Since then, planning has been understood by all parties as a democratic process that mediates between different interests – local and national, economic and environmental, short-term and long-term. The questions with which the planning system deals are complicated. Sometimes it will get the answers wrong, frequently the answers it gives will be unsatisfactory to particular interests. But CPRE believes that the complex questions dealt with by planning will not be made simple by fiddling with the system, or elevating economic interests over those of the community or the environment.

5. The core objective underlying planning should be sustainable development. This includes, but is more than just about, promoting economic development. It involves integrating a wide range of social, environmental and economic objectives and recognising the critical importance of environmental limits.

6. Planning enables decisions about the future of areas to be democratic, accountable and made in the public interest. It secures public consent over necessary development. It helps deliver outcomes that we cannot depend upon the market alone to deliver, such as affordable housing, urban regeneration, open space and community facilities. Planning gains its legitimacy as a decision-making process through being trusted by local communities and voluntary groups who should be involved at all stages in a process which must be transparent, accountable and accessible.

7. In particular, CPRE believes planning is a key tool for securing environmental objectives. It helps to deliver high quality environments, by ensuring the long term protection and enhancement of our wildlife, landscapes and historic environment in both town and country. This is good for people, and has benefits for business too. Planning should secure appropriate protection, conservation and enhancement of sites of international, national and local importance and recognise that valuable wildlife and landscape features exist beyond designated sites. The planning system should make a much stronger contribution to reducing and adapting to climate change, for example by reducing the need to travel.

8. Planning is also a key tool in facilitating economic goals. It enables the right type of development to occur in the right place, provides certainty to investors and enables different interests to be reconciled, with the overall goal of securing sustainable patterns of development. To do this planning requires more resources, a clearer focus on securing sustainable development, and strong political support.

Some key proposals expected in the Planning White Paper

Major infrastructure projects

9. The Government has expressed a concern that planning for major infrastructure projects takes too long. However, the delay factors they identify are often more to do with the wider issues surrounding complex schemes, such as funding sources, and also a result of poorly conceived proposals.

10. We anticipate that a proposal for a new separate planning system for dealing with major infrastructure projects such as motorways, airports, waste incinerators, power stations and reservoirs will be made.

11. The White Paper is likely to propose that the Government should set national policy statements for different kinds of infrastructure. The scheme promoter will then lead development of a particular infrastructure proposal and also carry out the public consultation at the pre-application stage. A newly formed Independent Planning Commission (IPC) will hold inquiries on the applications and determine whether a proposal can proceed.

12. CPRE is concerned that this approach would threaten the involvement of local communities and wider public interests in the planning process, and the proper consideration of environmental impacts. We would like to see an IPC which is advisory, not decision-making, democratically accountable, ensures effective public engagement, allows for the robust testing of evidence and is able to demonstrate environmental expertise.

Presumption in favour of development

13. We are expecting the Planning White Paper to propose a presumption in favour of development. The Government appears keen to rebalance the planning system in favour of economic development even though there is no real evidence that the planning system is a constraint on productivity. This is contrary to the principles of sustainable development, which seeks to integrate objectives and ensure we live within environmental limits.

14. CPRE believes there is no need for a change to the legal and policy framework on this matter.

Regenerating our towns and cities – the ‘needs test’

15. Current national planning policy has been successful in promoting the viability and vitality of town centres. We are expecting the Planning White Paper to propose the removal of the ‘needs test’ which has helped local planning authorities resist pressure for out of town retail development. This would undermine town centres and urban regeneration. CPRE would like to see the needs test not only retained but strengthened.

Participation in local plans

16. Engaging local communities and public interest bodies in the planning process is vital. It is especially important in the early stages of plan preparation for producing effective plans which enjoy local support. CPRE would resist any proposal to reduce opportunities for public involvement by streamlining the preparation of local development frameworks.

Wildlife, habitats and Green Belt under threat

17. We are concerned that the Planning White Paper will not recognise the importance of a high-quality natural environment for business, for people, and in its own right. By prioritising economic development, landscapes and habitats on the urban fringe and in the wider countryside would be threatened. Instead planning policies needs to be developed which afford stronger protection to valuable sites and join up fragmented landscapes to allow wildlife to adapt to climate change and to bring nature close to where people live;

18. The Planning White Paper is also expected to address other aspects of the planning system including the appeals process and Tree Preservation Orders. CPRE will be issuing a further briefing on the full scope of the issues raised in the White Paper once it has been published.

19. CPRE is a member of a coalition of leading environmental and social organisations which have come together to respond to the Planning White Paper.