Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-59)
YVETTE COOPER
MP, MS MICHELLE
BANKS AND
MS BERNADETTE
KELLY
11 JUNE 2007
Q40 Chair: Can I just ask you about
the level of detail that the planning process can get into in
supporting economic development policies? A lot of local authorities
are trying to develop clusters of particular types of industry,
often high-tech industries. Do you think that the planning process
needs amendment to allow authorities to favour that sort of industrial
development in a particular area and exclude other industries
that would not contribute to the particular specificity of the
cluster?
Yvette Cooper: It is a difficult
one as to how far you ask the planning system to look at particular
applicants effectively. Where you are talking about kinds of industry
or kinds of land use, the planning system can distinguish between
different kinds of land use, whether it is around leisure, industry
and so on. It is harder for the planning system to identify particular
kinds of business and respond differently in that way. What I
think we are keen to do is to see local authorities able to use
the planning system to support clusters, to support appropriate
economic development. That is one of the things that was identified
as part of the Barker review but you have to recognise also the
limits of the planning system's ability to make judgements about
different kinds of development as well.
Q41 Chair: So your view is that local
authorities should use other levers?
Yvette Cooper: I would be cautious
about how far the planning system is able to choose between different
kinds of development. You can where there are land use implications
but, as you say, there are other levers to look at. Again, we
will need to have a detailed discussion about PPS4, and we will
obviously need to take evidence as we do so.
Q42 Anne Main: The White Paper refers
to the use of market information. There has been quite a lot of
discussion in the media about the retail needs test. I would be
quite interested if you could expand on whether or not you envisage
the retail needs test being dropped.
Yvette Cooper: We set out in the
White Paper the approach that we want to take, which is to replace
the current needs test and the current impact test with a new
test. There are some limitations to the current needs test and
the way it works which can prove anti-competitive, which can,
for example, mean that you have an edge-of-town development in
an area where the town centre needs to expand and an application
for an edge-of-town development can end up being turned down on
the basis that there is not a need simply because there is an
out-of-town retail development not that far away. So there are
areas where you can have perverse consequences from the existing
needs test. Equally, we are very clear that to simply have the
impact test and the sequential test without the needs test would
be detrimental to the town centre approach, and so we are not
proposing to simply remove the needs test and to just depend on
the current impact and sequential test. Instead, what we think
we need is a new test. We have already been talking to a range
of different stakeholders about how you would draw up that test
to appropriately focus on town centres, to keep that `town centre
first' approach central in the policy, but equally to be more
pro-consumer and pro-competition as well.
Q43 Anne Main: I noticed that you
use the words "pro-competition" "competitiveness"
and "talking with a range of stakeholders". Do you accept
there has been some concern that this is a big business led proposal
with a lot of lobbying on behalf of very large retailers—I
am not going to name them but we all know who we mean—rather
than take into account some of the smaller businesses, which often
strive to survive within local authorities? If you have had a
recent retail needs test survey done by a local authority, such
as my own, would that still be allowed to stand given any changes
that you may be proposing?
Yvette Cooper: Obviously, we need
to set out the detail of how the new test would work and have
proper consultation on it. You talk about lobbying. There is obviously
intense lobbying in all directions around this and we are very
clear that the previous approach in the '80s and early '90s was
actually very destructive to town centres and had a very high
proportion of out-of-town development and we are very clear that
we do not want to return to that approach. I think the approach
that we need to take obviously needs to take account of the views
of smaller retailers, smaller businesses, and they are often central
to competition and have a serious amount of impact.
Q44 Anne Main: Can I ask about lobbying
on behalf of smaller businesses? Have you had much feedback from
smaller businesses on the impact of your proposals?
Yvette Cooper: To be fair, we
have not set out detailed proposals yet. What we are doing is
saying that we want to draw up a new test and what we want to
do then is to consult on it. This is an area where I think the
detail really does matter and therefore people will want to discuss
precise details, precise phrases. We could get right down to precise
language on the page that people want to discuss, but it seems
to me that it is possible to have an approach which is very strongly
pro-town centre but also gets away from some of the perverse consequences
of the current tests that are in place at the moment.
Q45 Mr Betts: Can I ask a question
on the needs test and the new impact test? First of all, we are
not going to have the needs test for individual applications but
the White Paper still says that the issue of need and demand for
new facilities will have to be part of the Local Development Framework
(LDF) for an area. The White Paper states: "It is essential
that local authorities have robust evidence-based plans and strategies
that are up-to-date and which set out a clear and proactive vision
for town centres based on a sound understanding of both the need
and the demand for new facilities." So there is still a needs
test, is there not?
Yvette Cooper: You certainly need
to look at need in terms of deciding, should your town centre
expand, whether you have enough areas designated for retail development.
There are plenty of towns across the country where actually the
town centres are often designated too narrowly and actually towns
should be expanding towards economic growth. Of course, you might
want to look at issues around need and so on as part of that LDF
process. But we are talking about having a new test in place and
that new test would apply to individual applications. We are not
talking about having a need test for individual applications.
Q46 Mr Betts: I will move on to the
new test in a second. One issue of concern is still around the
potential impact on town and city centres. The Government has
every right to be pleased that there has been a switch of emphasis
in terms of new retail development, favouring to a greater extent
now town and city centres, but while it has gone up from 14% in
1994 of new retail space that has been developed in town and city
centres, we are still only up to 40% of the total, are we not?
So we are still not talking about a majority of the new retail
development in town and city centres. Can we be absolutely assured
that any changes in this White Paper if carried through would
not reverse that improvement and we would actually see more than
40% of new retail development going on in town and city centres?
Yvette Cooper: Our intention is
very clearly not go back to the old framework and not to go back
to the level of out-of-town development that we were seeing under
the old framework. That is precisely why we have rejected the
proposal to simply remove the needs test and to simply have the
impact test. I think the area where this applies most importantly
actually will be around edge of centre development, which is currently
not included in town centres, so it is not included under the
current town centre framework but is in areas where actually what
is really happening is that town centres should be expanding and
you get potential developments on the edge of centres which are
prevented as a result of a competitor suddenly proposing an expansion
instead, or an extension instead, or an out-of-town development
proposing an expansion instead and therefore undermining what
actually is effectively a development which could have a positive
impact on a town centre.
Q47 Mr Betts: I want to move on to
that in a second but I want to be reassured that the Government's
intention is to do better than the 40% rather than seeing that
figure reduced.
Yvette Cooper: Certainly our intention
is to continue with the town centre focus and to continue with
town centre regeneration. What we have not done is set a specific
target about what proportion of retail development should take
place in town centres but we are very clear that we want to see—
Q48 Mr Betts: We would not want to
see less, would we?
Yvette Cooper: What we are certainly
not wanting to do is to change the approach so that you end up
with losing development from town centres at all, no. What we
certainly want to see is more regeneration around town centres
and more focus on town centre development.
Q49 Mr Betts: Can we just be certain
about edge of centre? I wonder whether at some point there might
be guidance given because there can be edge of centre developments
and edge of centre developments. Some can be effectively an integral
part with good transport links into the centre, others can be
sat on the edge of a centre but are nothing more than really an
out of centre development stuck on the edge of a centre where
the only real access is by car and you have all the problems you
would have if they were five miles away.
Yvette Cooper: Yes, you are absolutely
right. When I am talking about edge of centre, I have seen cases
where, for example, you have town centres where it takes five
minutes to walk across the town centre from one edge of centre
application to another edge of centre application; it is actually
a very short walk between the two and yet, because of the way
in which town centres are designated and the way in which the
needs test operates, you can have those applications being affected
even though they might actually both have a positive impact on
the town centre. What I am not trying to do is to rewrite the
way in which PPS6 should work through evidence of the Select Committee
because obviously, this is an area where you have detailed consideration
and you have to get the detail right. What I am trying to explain
is why there might be improvements that you could make that could
help town centres rather than simply see any change as being detrimental
to town centres.
Q50 Mr Betts: Can I just come on
to this new impact test and just link it in with the point you
made about consumer benefits from maybe greater competition? We
all know that some developers have been lobbying for relaxation
and it may be the out-of-town centre in an area is a Tesco and
Asda are keen to put up competition in another out of centre site,
and consumers might get some benefit in price from that competition
but it will only be certain consumers, the ones who have cars
and can drive there. When we look at the impact of that, are we
going to have regard in the new test to the whole issue of social
inclusion, for people without access to cars, to sustainability,
so we look at reducing the amount of driving that goes on, for
all the obvious reasons, and at the economic vibrancy of town
centres and the impact on them from any potential out-of-town
developments?
Yvette Cooper: Again, what I do
not want to do is obviously set out the way a new test would work
in discussion, without a clear programme of work to do so, because
we want to do this in a proper, systematic way and to have a proper
consultation on it. Certainly, at a time when we are setting out
a new PPS on climate change, clearly, sustainability is important.
Clearly, we would also want to make the impact on the town centre
the central consideration. That is the most important thing.
Q51 Mr Betts: Those are the sort
of issues where you cannot commit yourself to saying they will
be in the new test but they are the sort of issues you will be
looking at as part of the consultation?
Yvette Cooper: It is inconceivable
that you would have a new test that would not look at the impact
on the town centre. It has to be about the impact on the town
centre but you are right; the issues we are interested in looking
at are the wider issues around social impact on the town centre,
economic impact on the town centre, sustainability. I think the
point about social inclusion is a very interesting one and how
you can build that in. All the points you are raising are the
kinds of things that you would want to take into account.
Q52 Mr Betts: Developers do say to
you, and I have a lot of sympathy with them here, that certainty
and consistency are absolutely crucial, in particular for new
town and city centre developments. I just refer to my own city
of Sheffield, where there is a major scheme going ahead, a new
retail quarter. Hammersons are the developers, John Lewis are
doubling the size of their store and are really committed. When
you talk to them seriously they will say how marginal the decision
was, what a long time it has taken to stack up, there has been
help from English Partnerships to frontload the funding of it
to make it work. It is probably going to take ten years from the
start of the process to John Lewis actually opening part of their
new store. They have site assembly, CPO. There are long time frames,
and there is a big risk that any significant change in planning
policy that suddenly produced more out-of-town development could
put that whole process at risk. It is only going ahead because
of the certainty that the Government is being consistent and the
City Council is being consistent in supporting town and city centre
first policies. Any fundamental change could unravel all that.
Yvette Cooper: I think we are
clear that, in terms of what a new test would look like, its aim
will be to support exactly that kind of development in exactly
the same way that we do at the moment, and so to keep that very
clear priority for town centre development and to stop it being
undermined by out of centre development that has a detrimental
impact on the town centre. We are very clear that we need to continue
with that `town centre first' approach and also to prevent damaging
out of centre development. I do recognise that there is a risk
that until a new test is set up, people will raise questions and
uncertainties and so on. What we want to avoid is any planning
blight around this and that is why we have tried to be very clear
about the Government's intentions, why the Secretary of State,
Ruth Kelly has set out very clear statements in speeches and so
on about the very clear priority that we attach to town centre
development, to regeneration, to city centre investment and regeneration,
because we are very clear we want to be able to support that investment
framework and to support that long-term investment and not have
it jeopardised by people fearing that there will be destructive
out-of-town development, which we definitely do not want to see
and will not build into the new planning proposals in the new
PPS6.
Q53 Anne Main: On the edge-of-town,
I just caution the Minister to be sure that all aspects of this
are considered, because there are many complex towns and cities,
such as St Alban's, which has a vibrant market that comes three
times a week that relies on the fact that there is not a large
out-of-town Tesco, sucking 24 hours a day. If your competitiveness
is more important than, say, the vibrancy and diversity of some
of the quirkier market towns that we have, it could be that the
perverse consequence would be that you have the competitiveness
in price but you lose the diversity of many of our cities and
towns. I really hope that this move does not achieve that.
Yvette Cooper: It is that sort
of diversity and the impact on the town centre which is exactly
the kind of thing that you want to make central to the new test.
Q54 Anne Main: So that diversity
of supply of goods and services will be an important part of it?
Yvette Cooper: Yes. You want to
be able to talk about the impact on the town centre and the strength
of the town centre, and that means not simply a narrow definition
of what a town centre is. It actually means you take account of
all of those sorts of things. Precisely how you do that is something
that you need to have a whole series of detailed discussions about,
but we are very clear that what we do not want to do is to have
a swing back to the unrestricted out-of-town development that
we had in the past and to have a system which permits damaging
out-of-town development. Quite the reverse.
Q55 Anne Main: It is the edge-of-town
that you referred to and I mentioned, that with a five-minute
walk you can be out-of-town, which is not far to go if you are
having your fruit and veg at half the price that you could have
it in the town. That is going to be a very fine balancing act
for some of our smaller towns and cities.
Yvette Cooper: If an edge-of-town
development is damaging a town centre, then it should not be permitted.
The issue is there will be some areas where actually you will
have edge of centre developments that might support the town centre
and might be good for the town centre and might be good for that
area of the town centre where the needs test might make them impossible
because of an out-of-town centre development. So you could imagine
an area where if you have a proposal for an out-of-centre development
and a rival developer, a competitor, says, "You don't need
this additional retail space because we have already got an out-of-town
shopping centre that is sweeping up the need." You therefore
might prevent an edge of centre development which actually might
help support the town centre and help it compete with this out-of-town
centre development that exists. That is the kind of perverse consequence
you can have under the current arrangements but certainly I am
not in any way suggesting that you would therefore have a system
which makes it much easier to get edge of centre developments
which would be detrimental to the town centre. Certainly not.
You want to be able to support your town centre but you also want
to prevent some of the perverse consequences in the existing system.
Q56 Chair: I think we have explored
this issue long enough, though, as everybody knows, it is an issue
of enormous importance to all of us. Can I briefly, Minister,
ask about the requirement on local authorities to pay full regard
to the economic benefits of a development and what that would
mean for the developer? Do they have to provide an economic impact
report? Does it have to be consistent with the Treasury's Green
Book? Will this just be another huge amount of technical information
that nobody will read?
Yvette Cooper: Are you referring
to our proposals to revise PPS4?
Q57 Chair: Yes.
Yvette Cooper: Again, I am slightly
conscious, as with all of your areas of questioning, what you
are often asking me about is detail that we would need to set
out properly through documents that would need proper consultation
on. So we would need to do a draft PPS4, just as we will need
to do a draft new test, just as we will need to do detailed proposals
around national policy statements. In all of these areas I do
not want to be making policy on the hoof in response to your questions.
Chair: In that case, maybe you should
take it as an indication of the sorts of questions we will ask
you on the consultation when we get round to it.
Q58 Mr Hands: I have a very quick
couple of questions on local accountability in relation to the
IPCs. Will there be a commitment that the IPCs will meet in public?
Yes? Will they be subject to a standards regime as local councillors
are, and will they be effectively salaried government employees
sitting on the quangos and how many do you think might be needed?
Yvette Cooper: Certainly, they
would obviously have to conduct inquiries in public. They would
have to have proper procedures. They would have to have a whole
series of ... They would have to operate in a framework which
covered propriety issues and so on. Obviously, we would have to
set out a lot of this detail either in primary legislation or
in some areas in secondary legislation, which is where a lot of
the procedural guidance applies for local decision making. I do
not know, Bernadette, if you want to say any more about the detail
of the Commission as we envisage it at this stage.
Ms Kelly: What we are envisaging
is between 20 and 30 commissioners, although obviously that is
a point on which it would be helpful to get views. They would
be appointed according to the relevant rules in relation to public
appointments, and they would need to be independent. The Commission
would be supported by a secretariat of officials appointed on
a similar basis as they are to other independent bodies, independent
regulators and so forth.
Q59 Mr Betts: One brief issue: national
parks. They are a very special part of the planning system. Is
there anything in this White Paper that would fundamentally alter
the role of national parks as planning authorities?
Yvette Cooper: No.
| 
