Examination of Witnesses(Questions 280-299)
MR TONY
MCNULTY
AND MR
MICHAEL BACH
TUESDAY 17 DECEMBER 2002
Chairman
280. I thought we had run out of fish for these
canning factories! What worries me is you get the planning zone,
you get the land owner and he gets four people on to the site
and then he finds it very difficult to get the fifth one on and
there is the temptation for him to let the standards slip. It
may not be that it slips as far as an animal by-product, which
is my example, but it still slips to something that the other
people on the site are not very happy with.
(Mr McNulty) There will be a very, very strong framework,
almost a master plan, for each of the business planning zones
rooted in the strategic plan and the view is that it is about
high tech/low impact. I would not foresee a canning factory or
an animal by-products, or otherwise, being involved too.
(Mr Bach) The idea is that each Business Planning
Zone should have a very clear planning scheme which says what
is permitted and what is not permitted. With the example you have
given, somebody coming along and it is outside the framework they
will need planning permission for that. If it is within the framework
and it complies then it will not need permission. The planning
scheming will make quite clear what is allowable.
Dr Pugh
281. Nobody decides!
(Mr Bach) It will be agreed as part of the scheme
when the scheme is agreed at the beginning. When the zone is declared
it will be declared with its planning scheme.
282. What if it is contentious? What is the
issue is, does this fit in the scheme or does it not, who then
decides?
(Mr Bach) The planning authority
Sir Paul Beresford: It is freedom, but actually
there is not any freedom.
Chairman: Let us keep to the questions.
Christine Russell
283. Minister, how do you answer your critics
like, for instance, the county surveyors who claim that the wholesale
reform of the system that you are proposing will lead to uncertainty
which then will inevitably harm business competitiveness?
(Mr McNulty) I do not accept that at all. One of the
clear thrusts of the Bill and the extensive consultation process
from Green Paper all of the way through has had its root in clarity
and responsiveness, and that is what has driven most of the Bill.
I do not accept that at all from county surveyors or anybody else.
284. Can we move on then to the Planning Delivery
Grant, when is that likely to be announced? Secondly, when Lord
Rooker gave evidence to the Committee before he said that the
grant is not going to be ring-fenced. If it is not ring-fenced
how are you going to ensure that local authorities are not going
to use the additional resource for some other project or use it
for keeping council tax down, or whatever?
(Mr McNulty) You will know that the total plan delivery
grant is £350 million. We have announced in a headline way
more than anything else at the moment that £50 million of
that will be spent in the first year and the rest subsequently.
When the Deputy Prime Minister makes his announcement on resources,
as much trailed, in January he will be going into greater details
on it.
285. How are you going to—
(Mr McNulty) Do you want me to do the ring-fenced
bit?
286. Yes.
(Mr McNulty) I think in the broadest sense the relationship
between central and local government is changing. We are saying
to local government we trust you—I know you are laughing
because you are an ex Local Government minister.
Sir Paul Beresford
287. That must be one of the biggest errors
of statement you have made for a long time.
(Mr McNulty) Errors! We are moving more and more away
from ring-fencing, across the piece at ring-fencing. Local Government
is under no illusions about the responsiveness and responsibilities
that come with the Bill and are also increasingly—I have
certainly told them—under no illusion they cannot spend
this money on anything but getting their planning departments
up to speed, it will be performance related, and then come back
asking for money more, because there will not be any.
Chairman
288. You have had a chance to look at the transcript
when Lord Rooker was answering questions on this. He was very
insistent that it was not ring-fencing but it would work as if
it was ring-fenced. Is that right?
(Mr McNulty) That is what we would certainly hope
to be the case. Mr Beresford may laugh but it is about saying
to local government, you have rights and responsibilities, we
are not ring-fencing every single penny you get any more, we are
not ring-fencing it in this area we are responding to a need and
desire from local government to boost up their resources in terms
of what they can spend on planning departments and it is up to
them whether they do or not. Sadly much of the early reports,
I stress they are early reports, about what has happened on much
of the spend in terms of the 14% increase on planning fees this
year is that not a whole lot of it has gone into planning.
Sir Paul Beresford
289. Because you deprived them in other areas
and felt they were going to resist you.
(Mr McNulty) Which is why the relationship is changing
across the piece. We are seeking to get less and less ring-fencing
across the piece.
Christine Russell
290. How are you going to ensure this additional
money is used to improve a whole range of planning services, whether
it is to local residents or applicants, rather than just speed
up the performance. Is the speed going to be the only criteria
that you are going to assess?
(Mr McNulty) In January the details of the criteria
against which the Planning Delivery Grant will be judged will
come into place. We have already said there will be a performance
element and subsequent grants after year 1, this coming year,
will be based essentially on the quantum of improvements, not
just the speed, the quantum, where they start from and where they
are getting to. It is not just about saying to those who are right
up the top, if you increase by a few points you are going to get
a whole lot more of the grant, it is about the quantum from where
the local planning authority starts to where they get to. It is
about quality improvement across a range of essentially the best
value plan and indicators.
291. How confident are you that the performance
will improve quickly enough to justify the big hike in planning
fees?
(Mr McNulty) As I said before, crucially it is the
overall efficiencies of the planning system that need improvement,
not necessarily just the turnover of decisions. We are, not just
through the Planning Delivery Grant, in a wider sense working
with a whole range of professional bodies to try and increase,
which is absolutely necessary, the skills base and attractiveness
of town planning or planning generally as a career. We are under
no illusions that the PDG—which happily it is called now,
it was going to be called Planning Improvement Grants, so we would
be talking about PIGs all day—is going to increase performance
but we need to do a lot more to change the overall culture, up
the skills base and a whole range of other things. We are trying
to do that with the Planning Inspector, with RTPI and a whole
range of other bodies. We are getting to a stage now, talking
to those bodies, planning officers' societies and others where
there is a real sea-change that says that plans are important,
how they link with economic development and a whole range of other
things that sustain our communities are all important, rather
than simply the planning decision process.
292. How are you going to improve the dialogue
between planners and architects? You talked about the role the
RTPI, what about RIBA too?
(Mr McNulty) Across the professions involved in these
areas we are seeking to have far, far stronger dialogue encapsulating
all of these areas. I am not offending RIBA, I cannot remember
who said it, but somebody said to me over the summer that for
every one town planner that our education system produced it produces
twenty architects. There is something wrong with that balance
in terms of people's actual functions and contributions out in
the field. That is not attacking RIBA it is just a matter of fact.
Mr O'Brien
293. Both the Regional Development Agencies
and the British Retail Consortium have called for a planning system
that encourages economic development in a proactive way, what
are you going to do to bring this about?
(Mr McNulty) In essence that is really right where
we started from, where, as I say, much of the evidence that the
Committee has taken and the pieces of evidence produced show that
the system was not an impediment to business activity or economic
development. I say that is simply not good enough. We want to
move from that to being far, far more proactive. Business planning
zones and things that like are part of it. I think crucially moving
the focal point up to a regional level, where there can be much
more interplay between RDAs and regional economic development
focus, is part of that. More mundane things, like the review of
the planning obligation circular, like a review of all of our
PPGs and Planning Policy Statements will all help in that process,
not simply in terms of that being the only thrust of what we do.
As I say, I return to those three key interlinking elements, yes,
the country needs a land use and development control framework;
it needs a private system that is responsive to the communities
it serves and who live with the consequences and it needs a proactive
planning system that responds to the business community and economic
development. At a local and regional level it is always about
the balance of those three. They are asking me to let rip. Proactive
is code for let them do what they want in terms of out-of-town
retail or whatever else and that ain't going to happen.
294. On the question of economic development,
we have economic development teams and development control teams
all working within local authorities, the question is coordination.
What are you doing to encourage the joint working of these groups?
These are the stakeholders and it is important that we work together,
what are you doing about that?
(Mr McNulty) More and more at council level, certainly
when I go round to see local government that is happening already.
The notion that there is a separate economic development unit
that never spoke to the planners or the strategic people has almost
become a thing of the past. Certainly I think that is more and
more the case at the regional level, not least because of the
impetus and the focus on economic development from the best of
the RDAs.
295. The Prime Minister set up a strategic unit
to look at ways to measure control. One of the items in their
report is that the planning system causes delay on all waste facilities.
If we are going to allow a proactive system how can you address
that reference in the strategic report that the planning system
delays all waste facilities?
(Mr McNulty) It is fair point. You can almost turn
it round and it is about the balance I was talking about, much
of that delay is caused by the community reflecting on and not
necessarily always liking every significant application for waste
facilities. Should that be done more speedily? Yes, it should.
We are trying to do what we are doing in terms of the informalised
parts of the inquiry process. If they are major then it is through
the concurrent running of various aspects of the major infrastructure
project inquiry. That is happening. It is about balance.
296. It needs cooperation too. The initiative
has to come from somewhere, I would suggest planning.
(Mr McNulty) If things are working with the counties
where they are very, very explicit as to what that future waste
strategy is and that is reflected at least in part in the regional
spacial strategy and where appropriately the local development
framework then between them they should be able to resolve that
and get to a situation where they are not having massive enquiries
and delays every time they come up with an application for waste
facilities because much of those arguments have been rehearsed
previously during the plan process rather than the planning process.
Mr Mole
297. Mr O'Brien was talking about the ways in
which authorities can have a more enabling approach. The Corporation
of London talked us to about hand-holding through the process
and in that pre-application stage. What do you think of those
sort of approaches and are you not concerned that, (a) pre-application
discussions like transparency, and (b) the council can be seen
as being torn between helping an applicant and its quasi judicial
role.
(Mr McNulty) We are trying to almost formalise that
process by making provision for a statement of intent, which is
not a different version to outlined planning permission but it
is about saying at the very least that at the conclusion of those
early pre-application stages here is roughly what a developer
wants to do. Broadly if he has come to agreement with the local
planning authority on that the details are all consequent to that.
Here is broadly a statement of principle for development that
the local planning authority agrees to. I think the more we can
encourage transparency in pre-application processes the better,
that means responsibilities on all sides. I do share in part—not
least after 11 years on a planning committee myself, not always
privy to the pre-application discussion—some concerns about
the lack of transparency. As Mr O'Brien was saying, the more open
at the strategic stage in terms of the plans and how they relate
to the regional spacial strategies and subsequent interpretations
of those by councils as more applications come in the more open
that process is the more you will take the community with you.
What communities do not like is surprises.
Dr Pugh
298. The RDAs are charged with developing economy,
sustainable development, and so on. The Government grants are
a little bit anti-planning, does that worry you?
(Mr McNulty) It does not unduly worry me, it leaves
opportunities for all sorts of arguments to put their views forward.
299. You recognise a tension there, do you?
(Mr McNulty) I do recognise a tension. In part we
are moving to a system where most of the key players at the regional
level, including the regional planning bodies, when they come
into being, will have to work to measure far, far more than they
have done thus far. Rather like central government and local government
the notion of having little silos and ticking boxes and who has
responsibility for what is probably increasingly a thing of the
past. The thrust and nature of some of the things the RDA were
saying did not surprise me unduly but I thought they had missed
an opportunity rather than took full use of it.
| 
