| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Nicholls: The Minister has spoken of a policy shift towards planning, monitoring and managing. Is not the logic of that change in policy such that it should be
applied to the present situation in Devon? If things go ahead as planned, Devon will be transformed; it will be wrecked and ruined out of all recognition. The Minister has made a policy change on which I compliment him--now let him follow through the logic.
Mr. Raynsford: Clearly, with any change of policy there needs to be an orderly progression from the existing procedure to the new one. That is what we are doing. If the hon. Gentleman will bear with me when I come to Devon, he will see that the operation of the principles that underpin the Government's new approach is having a positive impact in Devon. I hope that he will recognise that.
As well as looking at the Government's figures as guidance, not as a target, we expect regional planning conferences to undertake urban capacity studies to explore the implications of changing policies and standards, which would reduce the land take of new development while securing attractive residential environments.
Against that background of need and capacity, the regional planning body should be able to take a realistic and responsible approach to future housing provision. It must be prepared to justify its views fully in public at the examination--that is fairly obvious. The structure plan and unitary plan authorities will, of course, be party to that process, so there is plenty of scope for them to negotiate and to discuss the apportionment between them.
Mr. Steen:
The problem is that the west country is run by the Liberal Democrats. They control the county council, the district council and the unitary authority, so it is the Liberal Democrats talking to each other.
Mr. Raynsford:
The hon. Gentleman displays a curious degree of ignorance of local politics. Is he not aware that the distinguished city of Plymouth is a Labour-controlled authority? He appears to have a complaint about the process of democracy. We are all here courtesy of that process and we should respect the verdict of the electorate.
The presumption is that, once the housing requirement has been established and confirmed by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State following the public examination, structure plans and unitary district plans should focus on the broad distribution and location of growth. The essence of the plan, monitor and manage approach is that both the assessment of housing requirements and distribution within the region should be kept under review. If there are signs of either under or over-provision, we expect both RPG and development plans to be reviewed accordingly. We need to work together in ensuring that the new approach is developed in as constructive a context as possible.
I want to deal with the points that were made by the hon. Member for Totnes about the Devon structure plan and the county's proposed new settlements adjoining Exeter and Plymouth. As I have mentioned, household growth is a fact and it is for local authorities in each area to find the best possible solutions for managing the growth sustainably. We cannot turn our back on the need to house people, and I do not think that any hon. Member would suggest that.
The Devon structure plan was not imposed by the Government; it was proposed and adopted by the local authorities on 26 February. That outcome shows that the
plan, manage and monitor approach is flexible, while maintaining our commitment to ensuring that everyone has the opportunity of a decent home. That approach is based on a thorough analysis of the available evidence.
The structure plan has raised two main issues: the overall figures for new housing and proposals for two new communities, one near Exeter and the other near Plymouth. Obviously, I shall concentrate on the one near Plymouth. First, I shall look at the overall housing provision. Regional planning guidance figures were agreed by the authorities in 1994 under the previous Government. They indicated 83,000 extra houses in Devon between 1995 and 2011, based on 1989 household projections. The independent panel that examined the plan in public in 1997 tested it against more recent 1992-based projections. Unusually, those projections were lower than the 1989-based set, and the panel therefore recommended 79,000 extra houses, a reduction of some 4,000 on the previous figure.
The five structure plan authorities published modifications in October 1998--at that stage, under the present Government. They proposed a lower figure still of 75,800 houses, 3,200 less than the figure that was recommended following the examination in public. There were two reasons for that. First, actual house building during the 1990s was well below the rates that were projected both in regional planning guidance and by the panel: during 1995-97, a period for which figures were not available to the panel, 2,100 fewer homes than the projected number were built. Secondly, it was felt that the achievement of Government objectives to reduce vacancies in the housing stock would absorb more of the extra households--an estimated 1,100 more.
After careful consideration of those proposals in the light of our new policy, spelt out in "Planning for the Communities of the Future", the Secretary of State accepted that the county's proposal for 75,800 houses did not need to be raised. We accepted its case that lower than expected house building during the mid-1990s did indicate a lower requirement for the period to 2011. That should not be taken as a precedent for other counties because circumstances vary from county to county.
Mr. Sanders:
Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Raynsford:
I will in a moment.
House building rates can be affected by a variety of factors--for example, land availability or other supply-side problems. The circumstances in Devon do not suggest supply-side limits to house building. In addition, the county level, 1996-based population projections that were published by the Office for National Statistics in December 1998 show a further small reduction in projected population growth for 1996-2006, which weakens the case for raising provision.
Mr. Sanders:
I want to clarify that point and get it on the record. Is the Minister saying that the amount of housing that has been accepted by the Government is less than was originally predicted under the previous Government and, therefore, that the comments of the hon. Member for Totnes (Mr. Steen) were less than accurate?
Mr. Raynsford:
Yes, I can confirm that, but I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman could not have drawn that conclusion from what I said. I thought that I had made it clear that that was the case.
We do not regard new communities as free-standing new settlements, as described in "Planning for the Communities of the Future." As proposed, they are distinct, compact new neighbourhoods close to, and with good links with the two cities concerned.
Mrs. Browning:
Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Raynsford:
I am afraid that I cannot give way to the hon. Lady. I know that she is greatly concerned about the matter, but I have only three minutes left and I have important matters to cover. I am sorry.
On the plan for Plymouth, no precise location has yet been proposed and no name has yet been given to the new settlement, but it is proposed that the development might be between half a mile and three miles from the urban edge of Plymouth.
The independent panel endorsed the new community proposals as potentially the best way in which to secure balanced and sustainable communities with the proper level of services and facilities. The Exeter community is related to large-scale employment development and a rail freight terminal proposal. The Plymouth one is being developed to meet the need for accommodation for people from Plymouth, which was graphically described by my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton (Mrs. Gilroy).
The whole aim is, of course, to ensure that we concentrate development in areas where it is appropriate and sustainable, rather than allow indiscriminate development across a wide area of rural Devon, which clearly is the concern of the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter), whose comments on the proposals, from what I have seen, have been entirely responsible and appropriate. The alternative to new settlements would be indiscriminate and unsustainable housing development. I do not think that anyone would welcome that.
The way forward lies in building on the positive options for meeting housing requirements and for protecting the countryside. There is far more common ground than is sometimes acknowledged. Everyone wants to see as much land recycling as possible and more sustainable patterns of development, to protect the countryside, to regenerate urban areas and to ensure that people are properly housed. The Government are developing that agenda as proactively as possible. There is much more work to be done to help authorities to develop that agenda.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |