Greg Clark, minister for cities, decentralisation and planning today unveiled the government’s planning reforms. The reforms reduce over 1,000 pages of planning legislation to just 50 pages. The government has said its reforms will simplify the planning system and boost economic growth.

image expired

The government claimed that, whereas planning regulation has until now been a specialised area, its new National Planning Policy Framework will bring planning into the public domain, encouraging decisions to be made at a local level, by presenting clear, understandable guidelines.

However, following uproar over the draft NPPF last year, the “unashamedly pro-growth” reforms have faced heavy criticism from environmental and conservation groups, as well as campaigners for affordable housing, who fear that large developers will be able to use their influence to spark a “development free-for-all”, to the detriment of communities and the environment, as the government’s definition of ‘sustainability’ remained vague in the run-up to today’s announcement.

There are concerns that cash strapped local bodies will lack the capital, time and resources to oppose development plans in their area, in the face of such deregulation and after government ministers have made it clear that the "default answer to development proposals" should be "yes".

Chancellor George Osborne, who looked forward to today’s publication of the NPPF when announcing the Budget last week, said current regulation is holding back development and preventing young people from prospering; as a caveat, he promised the new regulation would include a "presumption in favour of sustainable development," though green groups maintain the notion of ‘sustainability’ is poorly defined and has undergone a change in meaning since slipping into government parlance. As a result of this looser definition, they claim the new policy will be biased towards economic development.

Nevertheless, Greg Clark has attempted to counter these claims; the minister attempted to clarify his aims on the BBC this morning, “[The planning system] has become so complicated it’s become increasingly a matter for specialists. It’s very hard for people in communities to engage with the planning system, to protect the places they want to see protected. So the reason we’re making these reforms is to transfer the power from distant unelected bodies to communities to do that. It needs to be simpler.”

Asked to explain what amounted to sustainable development on the BBC’s Today programme, he said, "What it means is there is a test as to whether, in effect, it would be in the public interest to approve an application.

"If there are reasons, for example if it destroys the environment, if it builds on the green belt, if it builds outside a town centre if it's a commercial premises when you want to keep town centres thriving, then that would not be sustainable, it would not be in the public interest and so it should not go ahead."

Minister announces planning reforms

The minister today announced that the government reforms are based around three fundamental objectives. He said these are:

• To put unprecedented power in the hands of communities to shape the places in which they live;
• To better support growth to give the next generation the chance that our generation has had to have a decent home, and to allow the jobs to be created on which our prosperity depends; and
• To ensure that the places we cherish - our countryside, towns and cities - are bequeathed to the next generation in a better condition than they are now.

Mr Clark said, upon delivering the reforms, that top down targets and national planning policy guidance has led to “Communities seeing planning as something done to them, rather than by them.” He claimed that, over the last decade, fewer homes have been built in Britain than in any peacetime decade for 100 years, although the effects of the unprecedented four-year old financial crisis may be responsible in part.

Mr Clark lamented the fact that “The average age of the first-time buyer is approaching 40, and rising rents mean that families have to spend more and more on housing, and less and less on themselves and their children.”

He promised the new reforms would focus on a ‘local plan’, which would be central to the new planning system; that they would make planning simpler and more accessible to all and boost standards, resulting in better design.

He said that the “presumption in favour of sustainable development” would mean “development is not held up unless to approve it would be against our collective interest,” which the minister claimed would result in better protection for the UK’s natural environment and rich heritage, whilst benefitting business.

The minister announced that he had accepted 30 of the 35 recommendations on changes to planning reforms outlined by the communities and local government select committee, following consultation.

He offered assurance that “Sustainable development embraces social and environmental as well as economic objectives and does so in a balanced way,” claiming the new guidance “Recognises the intrinsic value and beauty of the countryside, whether specifically designated or not.”

Critics remain sceptical of reforms

However, critics of the draft reforms have remained highly sceptical and maintained that the devil will be in the detail with the new policy. Hilary Benn, who spoke after Mr Clark, linked the planning reforms to the cash for Cameron row, which was sparked on Sunday after it emerged that wealthy supporters of the Conservatives are allowed meetings with the Prime Minister in return for cash. He asked Clark to confirm whether any of the developers who will have been instrumental in forging the reforms were Conservative party donors.

Although Clark said the government has used the ‘Brundtland definition’ in its new policy, the planning minister also stated that he had included the five principles of UK Sustainable Development Strategy in the plans which were not present before, and which the Campaign to Protect Rural England had criticised the government for neglecting.

Nevertheless, Emmalene Gottwald, senior planning advisor at conservation group WWF-UK said, "Today's statement from the coalition government is disappointing and a lost opportunity with the pursuit of growth failing to account for the very real value that the UK's countryside and natural capital provides."

The immediate reaction to the proposals has been a cautious welcome from many countryside and conservation bodies, although all have said closer scrutiny of the radical reforms is needed. Damian Carrington, The Guardian’s head of environment, has expressed his misgivings over the apparent conflict of interest inherent in the reforms. In response to George Osborne’s salutation of the reforms as "The biggest reduction of business red tape ever undertaken," Carrington said, "Driving a JCB through planning rules seems hard to reconcile with Clark's statement that these new rules would enable communities to leave the nation for future generations in "better shape" than it is today."

Update.  28/03/2012. 08.30:

The NFU has welcomed the NPPF reforms as an improvement, though the union said it would have preferred the original, highly unpopular, draft as increased environmental concerns and the need for biodiversity protection have resulted in changes in the policy.  NFU head of policy services Andrew Clark said, “For too long the rural economy has been overlooked and underserved by planning regulations. As far as the NPPF refers to the need to support a prosperous rural economy and provision for affordable homes in the countryside, we welcome the framework.”

He said the union supported the recognition of the food and farming sector’s importance; local authorities will be expected to assess “the needs of the food production industry and any barriers to investment that planning can resolve.”

Increased environmental consideration will give many cause for relief. The section of the new framework on protecting the natural environment provides planning status for Nature Improvement Areas and introduces the concept of ‘stepping stones’ and ‘wildlife corridors’ as part of the countryside hierarchy. Furthermore, there is consideration for “Local green space to be mapped in local and neighbourhood plans with protection equivalent to green belt land.”

Tweet