Memorandum by the House Builders Federation
(PI 28)
INTRODUCTION
1. The House Builders Federation represents
about 800 house building companies who together build about 80
per cent of new housing in England and Wales.
2. We are involved in all stages of the
Development Plan process and our professional planning staff regularly
appear on behalf of the housebuilding industry at Development
Plan Inquiries. Our members do pursue individual interests by
taking part in Development Plan Inquiries but usually have a greater
involvement in Appeal inquiries under Section 78 of the Town &
Country Planning Act 1990. This memorandum, therefore, sets out
the view of the House Builders Federation on aspects of both Section
78 Appeals and Development Plan Inquiries whether that be through
inquiry appearances or via the Written Representations procedures.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
INTERNAL TARGETS
AND QUALITY
OF DECISIONS
3. The quality of decisions in both types
of Inquiry depends largely upon the particular inspector rather
than on the Inspectorate's internal targets. Quality of the reasoning
leading to recommendations following some Development Plan inquiries
was a problem in the early 1990s due to the sudden increase in
workload for the Planning Inspectorate. At the time, this also
seemed to affect Public Inquiries under Section 78. Whilst occasional
problems remain, overall the quality of decisions has greatly
improved over the past four or five years.
CONSISTENCY OF
DECISIONS
4. The planning system does not deal in
absolute values so a degree of subjectivity is inevitable. With
that as a starting point, absolute consistency of decisions taken
by a large number of Inspectors would be impossible to achieve.
In submitting evidence to Public Inquiries we regularly draw attention
to previous decisions by Inspectors where relevant but we recognise
that the professional judgement of an Inspector is critical if
the acknowledged impartiality of, and respect for, the Inspectorate's
role is to be maintained. There will always be cases where our
industry does not believe a decision is consistent with others
but, by and large, we do not believe it is a problem.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
THE INSPECTORATE
AND GOVERNMENT
OFFICES
5. The planning system treats representations
by the Government Offices in exactly the same way as any other
representation. That serves the process well, particularly as
the Secretary of State can always rely upon his call-in powers
if a Development Plan or Section 78 Appeal concerns significant
matters for him/her. In the case of Development Plan Inquiries,
the Inspector can only hold an inquiry into objections to the
plan so it is important that the relevant Government Office does
scrutinise plans and make relevant objections, especially if the
issue is concerned with Government policy.
6. In our experience throughout England
and Wales, the quality of representations to development plan
Inquiries by different Government Offices varies widely. That
inconsistency must at times cause difficulties for Inspectors.
ADJUSTMENT TO
WORKLOADS/VOLUME
OF LOCAL
PLAN INQUIRIES
7. Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning
Act 1990 placed an increased emphasis on the Development Plan
as a material consideration in making a decision upon an application
for planning permission. As a result, we and other interested
parties recognised a much greater need to be involved in the development
plan process, particularly Local Plans and Unitary Development
Plans.
8. This fundamental change in the operation
of the planning system resulted in a sudden huge increase in the
workload for the Planning Inspectorate in the early 1990s. Initial
problems caused by a lack of sufficiently experienced Inspectors
were evident resulting in delays in both Development Plan and
Section 78 Inquiries and, in our view, problems with the quality
of reasoning in some Inspectors' reports.
9. These issues were recognised by the Inspectorate
and following an increase in recruitment and training there has
been a considerable improvement. We recognise that the more experienced
Inspectors are now given responsibility for Development Plan Inquiries
(especially where they are likely to be long or particularly contentious)
and the use of planning assistants would appear to be of value
on occasion. Encouragement by Inspectors for participants to use
Round Table Sessions where appropriate has also reduced the timescale
of Development Plan Inquiries. In parallel, our Member Companies
have experienced a sharp reduction in the time taken to secure
a date for a Section 78 Appeal Inquiry and in the time taken to
issue decisions following appeals.
10. Unfortunately the reporting time on
development plan inquiries appears to be getting worse but this
is, no doubt, due to the increasing complexity of such inquiries
brought about by the increased importance of the development plan
system introduced through Section 54A of the T&CPA 1990.
HUMAN RIGHTS
LEGISLATION
11. There has been recent speculation within
the planning profession about the likely effects of human rights
legislation upon the operation of the planning system. We share
the Government's aim that the planning system should work effectively
and efficiently. Very clear guidance from the Government on how
the legislation is interpreted and applied will, therefore, be
necessary if potentially endless third party rights of appeal
and legal challenges are to be avoided.
INDEPENDENCE OF
THE INSPECTORATE
12. Our experience of many years' involvement
in the planning process leads us to believe that the majority
of participants view the Planning Inspectorate as a fair and impartial
judge. It is vital that such a role is maintained if the plan-led
system is to remain credible. The alternative would be an increase
in cases being taken through the formal court procedure since
this would remain the only available recourse.
CONCLUSION
13. The planning system removes the rights
of landowners to do what they wish with their land. The removal
of that right requires checks and balances to ensure that it is
genuinely in the public interest. The inspectorate fulfils this
requirement and, at the same time, ensures that decisions taken
by local authorities are consistent with the wider national interest
as set out in Government planning policy and guidance. For example,
the Inspectorate will have an important role in the implementation
of the Government's new guidance on housing (PPG 3).
14. In the example of PPG 3, the Inspectorate
will provide independent scrutiny of decisions taken by local
authorities to ensure they help meet its objectives. It will ensure
that planning decisions assist rather than hinder the Government's
targets for the proportion of housing to be provided on previously
used land (by ensuring a positive attitude to such development).
This function is performed in relation to many fundamentally important
aspects of Government planning policy (including meeting housing
and economic needs, protecting green belts, promoting sustainable
development and reducing the need to travel by private car).
15. The Inspectorate's dual role of ensuring
responsible use of the power to restrict a landowner's right to
develop, and maintaining the integrity of Government policy, must
be upheld in the national interest.
16. In general terms the Planning Inspectorate
has performed satisfactorily over many years. It provides much
needed impartial and expert independent scrutiny of the planning
system.
Mike Newton
Head of Planning
February 2000
| 
