ePolitix.com Stakeholders comment on the government's planning white paper.

Party Response: Liberal Democrats

Liberal Democrat housing spokesman Dan Rogerson said: "Superficially the planning white paper is about all the right things. 

"It promises a greater say for local people in planning, it promises to protect the environment and it promises greater powers for communities to protect their high streets. 

"However, the devil is in the detail. Ensuring a level playing field for our smaller shops is vital. Before we scrap the current planning protections for our high streets we need to ensure the government has got it right with its new proposals.

"Labour also promised there would be no more Twyford Downs. The reality of the government’s proposals is that the only way local communities will be able to stop major infrastructure developments will be digging tunnels and climbing trees.

"The government would like us to think they’re concerned about consultation but these proposals are all about streamlining the planning process - making it easier to push through decisions they know people will object to."

Stakeholder Response: Biffa

To send a comment to Biffa click here

Biffa said: "The planning system faces two extremes of challenges likely to require two different approaches - the retention of community amenity and continuity of well-being in the local  built environment juxtaposed with the delivery of large infrastructure modernisation in energy, transport, waste and water.

"All this will have to be predicated on overall improvements in terms of  integrated carbon impacts, resource efficiency and protection of biodiversity.

"The body proposed to achieve this will need confidence and support to believe that it can implement radical spatial planning strategies involving relocation, co-location and new development in an island already physically crowded by 200 years of industrial activity and politically crowded by multiple decision processes. Will this be the one?"

Stakeholder Response: FSB

To send a comment to FSB click here

The FSB said: "As a whole, the Federation of Small Businesses believes that the white paper on planning is a double-edged sword.

"The FSB has welcomed the proposals that would make it simpler for small businesses to go ahead with minor developments and extensions without the need for planning permission, which can be complicated and time-consuming. 

"However, the FSB has grave concerns about the removal of the 'need' test for new out-of-town retail development and believes that planning laws must still allow for the proper scrutiny of supermarkets, which are already under investigation by the Competition Commission for the alleged abuse of existing planning laws.  

"The FSB believes it is crucial that there are no further incentives to increase the building of out-of-town supermarkets, as this will have a negative impact on town centres and high streets, which is harmful to small businesses and the community."

Stakeholder Response: CPRE

To send a comment to CPRE click here

Marina Pacheco, CPRE’s head of planning, said: "‘This planning white paper has the potential to radically change the character of the urban and rural environment by putting the needs of business first.

"There are plenty of words in it about the environment, climate change and quality of life, but we question whether they are being given enough weight in what is proposed here."

Key concerns on the planning white paper are:

1. Major infrastructure projects - Despite calls from a wide variety of conservation and civic charities for the government to reconsider its proposals for speeding up the planning and building of major infrastructure – such as motorways, big power stations, runways, ports, waste incinerators and reservoirs – these proposals are going ahead without significant changes.

"We fear the proposals for major infrastructure projects will reduce the level of real community involvement in deciding what gets built in their local area.

"It has the potential to result in a ‘twin track’ approach where scheme promoters and large environmental organisations will engage in consultation but individuals and communities will find it difficult to have their voices heard.

"CPRE is also worried that the proposed Independent Planning Commission’s membership will be strongly influenced by economics and won’t have enough people with a robust environmental background."

2. Regeneration of our towns and cities – The ‘needs test’ which has helped ensure the vitality of our towns and cities is to be replaced by a form of ‘impact assessment’ for local authorities to use when deciding on applications for developments such as large supermarkets.

Unless correctly conceived this would make it easier to get planning permission for superstores which threaten smaller local stores and high streets.
 
3. Wildlife and Green Belt under threat

We welcome the government’s assurances that the green belt is to be maintained and improvements encouraged. However green belt does remain under threat in several regional plans – regional spatial strategies – across England.

Any further reforms to the recently reformed planning system must recognise the importance of a high-quality natural environment for business, for people and in it’s own right.

It must not prioritised economic development over the quality of the landscapes and habitats on the urban fringe and the wider countryside.

Marina Pacheco concluded: "‘We believe the planning white paper should be seen as a work in progress. We hope therefore to be able to work with the government over the coming weeks to prevent changes in the planning system which would lead to unsustainable development.

"CPRE is a member of a coalition of leading environmental and civic organisations which have come together to respond to the planning white paper."

Stakeholder Response: Woodland Trust

To send a comment to Woodland Trust click here

James Cooper of the Woodland Trust said: "The principles which underpin these proposals are at odds with the government’s own sustainable development commitments which recognise that equal weight must be given to environmental and social concerns as well as economic ones.

"The agenda which is driving this white paper is too heavily weighted towards the economic interest. 

"The proposals to speed up the planning process for major infrastructure projects will cut communities out of a say over planning decisions and pose a serious threat to important habitats such as ancient woodland.

"No, one is saying that there cannot be any development but if development is to be responsible and genuinely rooted in promoting quality of life and tackling challenges such as climate change as the White Paper suggests, then communities and the natural environment should be afforded far greater priority by the government.

"We hope that it will rethink the proposals so that they better reflect its own stated commitments elsewhere.

"Failure to practice joined up government was one of the besetting problems of the Blair era’s environmental record.

"Amending these proposals to reflect the fact that being green cannot mean economic development being elevated above all other concerns would be a positive sign that a Brown administration is not heading down the same road."

Stakeholder Response: Freight Transport Association

To send a comment to FTA click here

FTA chief executive Richard Turner said: "Under the present planning arrangements it is an absolute miracle that we have been able to construct such invaluable assets like the M25 and the M40. 

"Where would we be without them?  Yet despite the absolutely essential need for these roads, they were not achieved without the most enormous difficulty, waste of time and vacillation resulting from dozens of endless local planning inquiries, dominated not by legitimate local issues but by the need for the road at all. 

"That is no way to manage the construction of infrastructure in the national interest, which is so vital for both personal mobility and the needs of UK industry in delivering goods and services with economy, efficiency and with proper care for the environment and which is constantly snagged with congestion due to inadequate roads capacity.

"It must be common sense for industry and others for ‘need’ to be established by government, leaving detail to be decided locally.

"Central government must be allowed to create and implement strategic infrastructure policies which provide an overall plan to support and deliver the economy.

"As the user and the paymaster, industry should define the service outcomes it requires – journey time reliability, freight capacity, performance and safety levels etc – and then expect the government to deliver appropriate facilities to meet those needs. 

"That is not presently the case.  However, the new white paper lays out that highly attractive prospect."