The claim
“We are putting local people in the driving seat in a way they never have been before. Scrapping top down, regional decision-making so local people can choose the areas they want developed – and those they don’t.”
Nick Clegg, 14 September 2011
The background
David Cameron has written to the National Trust this week to seek to reassure the organisation’s 3.5m members that he isn’t planning to bury the English countryside under a carpet of concrete.
The Government’s intention to replace the 1,000-odd pages of planning law with the 52-page National Planning Policy Framework has attracted the wrath of the Trust, the RSPB, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, the Daily Telegraph and some Conservative backbenchers.
Criticism of the draft NPPF has centred on its “presumption in favour of sustainable development”, something activists fear could lead to a “developers’ charter”, with rural England sacrificed to make way for the thousands of new homes the Government says are desperately needed.
Ministers have repeatedly claimed that the new framework will mean local people get more of a say in the planning process.
Mr Cameron said again in his letter that the Coalition’s proposals will “strengthen local participation”.
The analysis
It’s important to note that the “presumption in favour of sustainable development” won’t mean developers get an instant green light from local authorities, who will still get to decide whether or not to allow new building to go ahead.
But critics say councils will be less likely to turn down applications for planning permission because of this presumption, and the phrase is so vague – with no definition of “sustainable” spelled out – that lawyers will have a field day arguing about what it is supposed to mean.
An equally worrying but less extensively reported section of the NPPF appears to go further than just a “presumption” in favour of developers getting the go-ahead to build more homes.
Paragraph 14 of the document states: “Local planning authorities should plan positively for new development, and approve all individual proposals wherever possible.
“Local planning authorities should…grant permission where the plan is absent, silent, indeterminate or where relevant policies are out of date.”
The “plan” being referred to here is a council’s “Local Plan”, a document drawn up, usually after a lengthy consultation period, to shape the future growth and development of the area.
So the implication is that, in parts of England where there is no Local Plan in place, Government guidance as it stands is for councils not just to give added weight to the need for development, or make a “presumption in favour” of granting planning permission, but to simply “grant permission”.
How much of the country are we talking about here?
The latest figures released by the Department of Communities and Local Government were originally drawn up in December last year.
At that point, only 46 per cent of local authorities in England had come up with a Local Plan, even in draft form, and only 22 per cent of those had been approved by the Secretary of State.
By May this year, the department said, a further 8 per cent of councils had had their plans approved, and 23 per cent more had published them in draft form.
That still means that only 30 per cent of all councils in England have a Local Plan in place now.
Those local authorities are home to only 30 per cent of the English population, and represent 26 per cent of the total land mass – leaving three quarters of the country out of the planning loop.
So if the NPPF was adopted tomorrow it appears that less than a third of local people would have any effective veto against new developments.
Of course the new policy proposals won’t come into effect tomorrow, and new Local Plans are being approved all the time.
But with the reforms expected to be approved within months, critics are casting doubt on whether many councils will be able to rush through the process in time.
Even the Local Government Association – a body which has long called for the simplification of the planning process, and one which broadly supports the Government’s reform agenda – says: “Local government must be given enough time to consult with their communities to create plans that promote the sort of development that will support local economies, improve people’s quality of life and protect and enhance local environments.
“At the moment the time-frame is too tight, and the process for getting local plans approved is too bureaucratic and complex.”
The verdict
The Department of Communities and Local Government told FactCheck they were urging as many councils as possible to put Local Plans in place – and if we’re casting blame here, it’s worth remembering that most local authorities have had since 2oo4 to get the job done.
The department insisted that the NPPF has safeguards built into it designed to curb the environmental impact of development, protect land in green belts, areas of outstanding natural beauty, ancient woodland and the like.
They also referred to neighbourhood plans, an idea being trialled now, which appears to give local people the power to speed up developments they want without the need for planning applications.
But it doesn’t appear to enable them to say no to developments they don’t want.
A spokesman said: “Our planning reforms will put power back into the hands of local people, ensuring they are in charge of deciding the areas they wish to see developed and those to be protected.
“This will be done through their Local Plans which will be sovereign and drive planning decision making. Where a plan isn’t in place, strong environment protections apply, ensuring safeguards for the environment.
“We are also introducing neighbourhood plans, which for the first time allow local communities to decide the shape and look of their areas.”
The Government has set a six-month limit for councils to get Local Plans in place after the planning reforms are approved.
It seems likely that a significant number of local authorities will not meet that deadline, leaving a potentially huge number of local communities without safeguards against unpopular developments.
And even that may not be the full story. Even a council with a Local Plan in place might find developers arguing that the document is “silent, indeterminate or…out of date” on key questions, since like “sustainable development”, the Government has failed to define any of these terms.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Government’s drive to simplify planning and promote house-building, it’s difficult to see how ministers can say that local people will have more of a say in deciding what gets built in their area.
By Patrick Worrall
