1. Tomorrow (Thursday), the Government is expected to announce its proposals to revise planning guidance in Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres. [1]

2. On Monday (7 July) it was reported that Hazel Blears will bring forward proposals ‘to ensure we do not see more stretches of the nation’s high streets turned into bland “every towns”’.  She recognised the need for “more individuality, more small scale independent shops, and a new spirit of independent enterprise on our high streets.” [2] 

3. CPRE welcomes this apparently significant change of emphasis from the Secretary of State, by comparison with previous Government statements.  We look forward to the detail of the proposals to deliver this aim.  Hitherto, the Government’s proposed changes to town centre planning policy make no mention of small scale independent shops.  To the contrary, the Government has made an economic case for more development outside town centres, less constraint, promoting competition and increasing consumer choice (paras. 7.50 - 7.55).  Nothing suggests measures to protect diversity or the independent and small scale stores which truly deliver it.

Removing the needs test?

4. The Government has been expected to remove the ‘needs test’ and will require councils to ‘take a deeper look at how new businesses affect the health of town centres’ through ‘a more rounded ‘impact test’ which assesses the risks and benefits of new businesses on existing small shops and the town centre’.

5. These proposals are the same as those in the 2007 Planning White Paper [3] and in the 2006 Barker Review of Land Use Planning.  The Barker Review gives the reason for these changes to make wider planning policy more responsive to economic factors. [4]   There is no mention of protecting towns from the ‘clone town’ effect or retaining the specialists and small shops that give our towns their character.

6. Barker also argues that developers not councils should decide whether there is enough demand to make developments viable, rather than planners assessing if there is sufficient ‘need’ for a given application [5], hence the proposal to get rid of the needs test.  

7. CPRE’s believes that saving the individual qualities of town centres and independent retailers is inconsistent with removing the needs test.  We will look for the detailed measures in tomorrow’s proposals which ensure that:

• existing policies to protect town centres are strengthened not weakened;

• planning authorities keep the powers to decide the best mix of retail in the right places to deliver social, environmental as well as economic benefits;

• diversity and appropriate scale are protected and promoted;

• town centres are strengthened and regenerated, not cloned or left to decay.

8. Tom Oliver, Head of Rural Policy at CPRE said: ‘To say that local independent retailers and locally distinct town centres can be secured by abolishing the needs test would be a spin too far.  No-one who understands the essential truths of local retail economies believes that.  The needs test is indeed needed, if we want real choice in the future.’

9. CPRE’s report, The Real Choice, on the potential impact of a new supermarket on the local retail economy in a market town and its surrounding villages in Suffolk was published in 2006.  CPRE has previously observed that a narrow obsession with fostering competition between a few giant retailers who offer a very similar quality of product and service will do little for the quality of life (http://www.cpre.org.uk/library/results/local-foods).

Notes for Editors

[1] Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres, 2005.  The guidance aims to deliver Government’s objective of ‘promoting vital and viable town centres’ and do this by focusing development ‘in existing centres in order to strengthen, and where appropriate regenerate them’. It incorporates two key tests to deliver these aims.  The first – the need test – assesses ‘likely future demand for retail and leisure floor space’ and uses that assessment to decide where growth should go to best ‘strengthen or regenerate existing centres’(2.34).  The second – sequential test – gives preference to developments in order of location with town centre first, then edge of centre locations and finally out-of-centre sites.’  (para 2.44).

[2] Evening Standard, 7 July 2008, Paul Waugh, Blears: I’ll change rules on planning to protect town centres.

[3] Planning for a Sustainable Future – White Paper, May 2007
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture

[4] Barker Review of Land Use Planning Final Report – Recommendations, December 2006 http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/A/barker_finalreport051206.pdf
p201, Recommendation 4.

[5] Review of Land Use Planning Final Report – Recommendations, December 2006 p7.