2 minute read
Carry on planning
News {
Carry on planning
By Laura Edgar
Last year, the government published Planning for the Future, a white paper Prime Minister Boris Johnson said would make the planning system “simpler, clearer and quicker to navigate”.
It has received a number of criticisms: MPs have called it a “developer’s charter”, suggesting that it lacks detail and will undermine local democracy.
In a House of Commons debate on the forthcoming planning bill, which was announced in May in the Queen’s Speech, Labour MP Hilary Benn noted: “I cannot think of a system less likely to encourage local communities to take responsibility than one in which the final decision is removed from their hands.”
But that’s not all.At the Minerals Planning Conference in June, delivered jointly by the RTPI and the Mineral Products Association (MPA), Simon Gallagher, director of planning at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) noted that one of the comments the ministry has received is that minerals planning did not feature. “Any document that is produced by MHCLG is going to major on housing... and they’re not going to apologise for that.
“We very much understand that any reformed planning system will need to work for minerals planning.”
This was the first of his messages – keep calm, minerals planning has not been forgotten.
Both chief planner Joanna Averly and housing minister Christopher Pincher have previously urged local councils to get local plans in place and to keep them up to date. Gallagher also addressed this issue, saying that proposed reform always raises questions about what it means for continuing work.
Ministers, however, are clear that until any changes are in place, “they want to see decisions on planning applications, including minerals planning applications, made swiftly on the basis of evidence”.
Message number two: “We need to carry on.”
Gallagher also discussed engagement – message number three – which can get rather formal between the government and those involved, such as consultations and public statements. He noted that while “really valuable”, such engagements are “not real”.
“I want to encourage you at this point to be prepared to have much more meaningful conversations, to be ready to talk in a bit more detail, to be ready to expose the differences of views that you will have, and the people within the industry will have about what needs to be done.”
Reforming bourbon biscuits…
Planning reform was the focus of a panel session too. Here are the key points:
Lonek Wojtulewicz MRTPI, planning and infrastructure
division at MHCLG, noted that the digital agenda in the white paper, “should make things simpler, easier to find your way around, and equally, easier, in theory, for the public to engage”.
This is a “fundamental improvement” that the reforms are trying to achieve – more engagement from the public.
Stephen Redwood, land development and permitting director, Europe,
at CEMEX, said it’s in the industry’s best interests to make things work. However, while there are “really good” authorities out there, “it has become increasingly evident that not all authorities are
