Examination of witnesses (Questions 300
- 320)
TUESDAY 30 JUNE 1998
MR JOHN
BALLARD, MR
PHILIP WOOD
and MR PAUL
EVANS
300. Can you give us any information about
a fourth round of the Rough Sleepers Initiative in London and
elsewhere?
(Mr Ballard) I cannot give you a definitive answer.
The future of the Rough Sleepers Initiative is something that
the Social Exclusion Unit has been asked to look at as a priority
measure. To me, it is inconceivable that continued assistance
of some kind will not be provided. The report of the unit will
be available shortly before the summer break.
Mrs Dunwoody
301. When I endeavoured to find out from
the Library where the Social Exclusion Unit was located in order
to address some correspondence to it there seemed to be some confusion,
if not pure ignorance, about it. Where is the unit located physically?
(Mr Ballard) The Cabinet Office.
Mrs Ellman
302. Do you say that the initiative would
be the decision of the Social Exclusion Unit?
(Mr Ballard) No. I am saying that the Social Exclusion
Unit is looking at the whole area and will be making recommendations
about how provision should be carried forward in future and what
it should be. I cannot pre-empt that conclusion because I am not
party to it. All I say is that its first set of recommendations
is expected to embrace this area.
303. When are they expected?
(Mr Ballard) The appropriate word is "shortly"
which I construe to mean before the summer recess.
Dr Whitehead
304. I refer to page 27 of the report. One
sees a note about consultations on amendment of the Building Regulations.
It is noted that in 1998 there will be a further review of building
regulation requirements that deal with energy efficiency. What
progress are you making on this?
(Mr Ballard) There are two sets of regulations.
As to disabled access, we expect to bring forward regulations
in the autumn.
Chairman
305. When you say "bring forward"
what do you mean?
(Mr Ballard) They will be laid before Parliament.
306. When will they come into effect?
(Mr Ballard) They will come into effect 12 months
after being laid. I believe that that was what Nick Raynsford
said on 9 March. As to energy efficiency, we announced some proposals
in February which Nick Raynsford wants to review. We have had
a series of workshops examining those general proposals. In consequence
of that, a lot of ideas have come forward and a consultation paper
will be issued on 3 July with specific proposals as opposed to
more general suggestions.
Dr Whitehead
307. I ask you to turn to fig.7.f on page
60 which sets out the performance of the Planning Inspectorate
in relation to planning inquiries. It is not very good, is it?
(Mr Ballard) The Planning Inspectorate has had
to deal with a considerable rise in the number of appeals. It
responded to that about two years ago with a three-year programme.
It made clear at the outset that it would take time to bring things
back into kilter. We can demonstrate that it is on track to doing
that. For example, its outturn in 1996-97 for written representations
was 25 weeks; in 1997- 98 it is 21 weeks. The target for 1998-99
is 18 weeks. As to hearings, the outturn in 1996-97 was 47; in
1997-98 it was down to 40; and the target for 1998-99 is 24. Dealing
with inquiries, we have moved from an outturn of 56 weeks in 1996-97
to 52 weeks in 1997-98. The target for 1998-99 is 36 weeks. The
targets for 1998-99 are significantly lower and very close to
what can be delivered statutorily given the various processes
that each must go through. We would not set those targets if we
did not think that they were demanding or achievable.
308. The inspectorate is moving forward
but lagging behind the targets that have been established?
(Mr Ballard) That is right.
309. What is the reason for that?
(Mr Ballard) I do not believe that there is any
easy explanation for it. To go back to what I said a moment ago,
we do not want to set easily achievable targets but demanding
targets. I do not think that we should be too dismayed if the
inspectorate fails to meet them by a small amount. On written
representations the shortfall is not considerable. The main concern
must be in relation to inquiries where there is a significant
shortfall.
310. Dealing with the performance indicator
of determination of local authority planning applications within
eight weeks, are you discussing with anyone, perhaps the Audit
Commission, how to make that measure rather more meaningful? I
am sure you are aware that there has been a good deal of criticism
of different practices of local authorities, for example some
bringing people in before determination to get the application
right and others just whacking it through committee and throwing
it out, thereby meeting the target. What has been happening?
(Mr Ballard) We share that concern. Eighty per
cent in eight weeks is a simple target, but we have been concerned
by stories about individual authorities manipulating their approach
to this matter. We have been trying to discover if there is some
other form of indicator upon which we can alight that is both
easy to understand and makes more sense. We have been talking
to the Planning Officers' Society and the National Planning Forum
which reflects local authorities and users of the planning system.
The Audit Commission is also looking at this area. We have not
come up with anything definitive but are continuing to try to
work through it. We recognise that the present indicator is not
as satisfactory as we would wish. I cannot give an undertaking
now that we will have something by a given date, but the department
is conscious of the need to do something.
311. You are conscious of the fact that
the eight weeks tend to be used as a stick with which to beat
a local authority on the head even where objectively it is pursuing
good practice in planning?
(Mr Ballard) The difficulty is that some people
play by the book and organise themselves properly and handle the
applications in eight weeks. Other authorities do not. There is
a third category of authorities where the figures are manipulated.
Our concern has been to try to ensure that best practice that
is followed successfully by some authorities is carried through.
312. For example, that there is a satisfactory
result all round?
(Mr Ballard) Yes. I believe that that is part
of the general need to look at these things in the context of
best value.
313. In paragraph 7.10 reference is made
to ensuring that the planning system puts the principle of sustainable
development into practice. It is said that it is hoped that a
good practice guide will be published shortly. Is that imminent?
(Mr Ballard) This will come out after the integrated
transport White Paper.
Chairman
314. How soon after?
(Mr Ballard) We have looked at this carefully
over the past year. The wider policy on transport and sustainability
has been developed. We have been very keen to ensure that it is
compatible with what emerges from the White Paper. We are keen
to get it out. I cannot give an absolute time. If it does not
come out before the summer recess it will come out very soon after
you come back.
Christine Butler
315. Is it ready and waiting in the queue?
(Mr Ballard) It is there.
316. It is ready and waiting for the transport
White Paper?
(Mr Ballard) I do not want to be drawn on an exact
date. It does not require a lot of work to put it into a satisfactory
shape.
Chairman
317. What is the target for the Minister
to decide planning appeals?
(Mr Ballard) I should know the answer to that,
but I am afraid that I cannot remember it off the top of my head.
318. Is it something like Terminal 4—three
or four weeks?
(Mr Ballard) If the Minister made a decision on
Terminal 4 in three or four weeks both you and we would be surprised.
Terminal 5 is a matter of concern. Obviously, once we get the
inspector's report, which we hope will be by the end of this year,
we will want to deal with it as quickly as possible.[4]
319. Can you provide a note as to how quickly
Ministers are dealing with these matters?
(Mr Ballard) Yes.
320. There were one or two other questions
on which the Sub-Committee was not very happy. We were particularly
concerned about the implications of the minimum wage. If you cannot
give us any more than the £50 million as an overall figure
for personal social services is it possible to get some indicative
figures from one or two local authorities who may have been lobbying
the department in terms of refuse collection, street cleaning,
office cleaning, housing maintenance and repair and all the other
things that may affect them as contractors?
(Mr Wood) We will take that away and see if we
can provide information to help the Sub-Committee.
Chairman: On that
note, thank you very much.
4 Note by witness: Completion of evidence should
be by the end of the year. The inspector's report will follow
later. Back
| 
