Planning changes under pressure

A default “yes” to development should be removed from the Government’s attempt to simplify the planning system, according to a report published by a cross-party Commons committee today.

The planning process could be slowed down rather than speeded up as ambiguity leads to “planning by appeal”, the MPs warn.

The Government says the changes to simplify the planning system, which focus on a “presumption in favour of sustainable development”, are needed to boost growth, give communities more say in their local area and protect the environment.

But the draft reforms, which have seen 1,300 pages of planning rules cut to just 52, have provoked a storm of protest, particularly from the National Trust, amid concerns they could lead to urban sprawl and damaging development.

The MPs said the draft national planning policy framework (NPPF) “emphasises a ‘default yes’ to development, that applications should be approved unless the adverse effects ‘significantly and demonstrably’ outweigh the benefits, and it weakens policies such as brownfield development first and town centre first”.

They added: “This carries the risk of the planning system being used to implement poorly planned, unsustainable development. The ‘default yes’ to development and the phrase ‘significantly and demonstrably’ should be removed from the text.”

To prevent poor quality development, MPs say that a clear definition of sustainable development is required, warning that clarity had been lost in the pursuit of brevity.

Committee chairman and Sheffield South East MP Clive Betts said: “The Government wants to simplify the planning system, make it more receptive to all forms of sustainable development, and is keen to ensure effective decisions are reached more quickly.

“Yet, as currently worded, the framework would introduce several ambiguities that are more likely to slow down the planning process.

“Gaps or contradictions in the document are likely to fuel a system of ‘planning decision by appeal’ instead of the local decision-making that ministers advocate.”

The MPs said the presumption that all applications should be approved unless the adverse effects “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits should be re-written to avoid hampering sustainable development. The system should also put the burden on developers to prove a scheme will not do significant harm, rather than planners proving it will.

The committee welcomed the Government’s openness to reinstating a reference to favouring development on “brownfield” land first, currently missing from the proposed reforms, and to improving the definition of sustainable development.

Planning Minister Greg Clark said the Government would “consider carefully” the suggestions along with all responses to the consultation. He pointed out that the committee had supported the concept of a streamlined planning system.

“We are determined that the National Planning Policy Framework will put power into the hands of local people, through a simpler, clearer system, which safeguards our natural and historic environment while allowing the jobs and homes to be created that our country needs.”

But Shadow Local Government Minister Roberta Blackman-Woods said: “This is a strong condemnation of the Government’s draft national planning policy framework by the Select Committee, and a vindication of all the campaigners who have fought so hard.”

Comment: Page 12.