Planning shake-up ‘litmus test’

John Longworth, new director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, accused campaigners – including the National Trust – who claim the shake-up could lead to concreting over green fields of “scaremongering” and said Britain risks becoming a “living museum” and tumbling down the world’s economic league unless the changes are introduced.

Meanwhile the Government’s countryside adviser has also called for an “injection of sense” in the debate, stressing young people in rural areas are in desperate need of affordable housing.

The controversy is raging over plans to tear up hundreds of pages of planning policy and replace them with simpler guidelines to speed up the process and cut costs for developers in order to stimulate the economy. The central part of the shake-up is the introduction of a “presumption in favour of sustainable development”, sparking a furious campaign from groups who fear this gives insufficient weight to environmental concerns.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg met National Trust director general Fiona Reynolds on Sunday and insisted the reforms were necessary and that concerns were being taken seriously.

But with businesses complaining the current system is too slow and bureaucratic, Mr Longworth has warned Ministers not to back down.

“The whole planning debate is quite remarkable really,” he said. “We’re in the middle of the biggest recession since the 1920s and 30s and yet we have people like the National Trust scaremongering about building on greenfield sites which is not what a presumption in favour of planning is about.

“They are talking only about housing developments, supermarkets ... but not mentioning this is all about enterprise, growth and jobs and actually the very people who might be concerned about these things will also want to have their children employed.”

Singling out the National Trust, he said it was “curious” a membership organisation set up to preserve property and land “has been hijacked into becoming an interest organisation campaigning for something that’s quite apart from that”.

But he also said it was the responsibility of businesses to become “cheerleaders” for the reforms and make sure the Government does not back down in the face of opposition as happened on policies such as the proposed forests sell-off.

“If you listen to some of the commentary that’s been made recently, Britain would become a living museum. We would lose our relative position in the world economy and eventually that would lead to us not being able to provide for our people the things they will want in the future. Our children’s future will be bleak as a consequence.

“It is a bit of a litmus test of the Government’s resolve to actually encourage growth and prosperity in the UK. If in fact they deconstruct this presumption in favour of development, what it says to me is the Government have abandoned growth and prosperity in the UK.”

Ministers have offered to go through the new planning guidelines – being consulted on in draft form – “line by line” with campaigners in an attempt to ease concerns. Local Government Minister Greg Clark said last week that he was willing to “clarify” guidelines where necessary.

But Mr Clegg and Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander have both defended the reforms this week.

The Government case will be helped by the intervention of Stuart Burgess, chairman of the Commission for Rural Communities, who warned that the debate was “in danger of losing sight of the needs of those who are most likely to be affected by it: the residents of rural communities”.

He called for “an injection of sense into this debate” and urged the Government to “clarify what is meant by the presumption in favour of sustainable development” to ease concerns. Adding 10 or 12 buildings to rural communities would tackle a housing shortage without causing damage, he said.

A National Trust spokeswoman said it was “entirely within our core purpose” to be campaigning, and denied “hijacking” anything. “We need the planning system in a fair and balance social, environmental and economic needs. It should be a natural framework, it shouldn’t be a tool to deliver economic growth. That’s why we’re campaigning.”