Communities and Local Government CommitteeWritten evidence from National Grid
Executive Summary
1. National Grid welcomes the objectives of streamlining and consolidating national planning policy and we are broadly supportive of the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Within the context of our support for the general direction of these reforms, there are a number of areas in which further clarification and refinement is required. In summary these are:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
2. National Grid is a member of the UK Business Council for Sustainable Energy
National Grid—An Introduction
3. This response is provided on behalf of National Grid. National Grid owns and manages the grids to which many different energy sources are connected. In Britain we run systems that deliver gas and electricity across the entire country. In the North East US, we provide power directly to millions of customers. We hold a vital position at the centre of the energy system. We join everything up.
4. Our purpose is to connect people and businesses to the energy they use. We all rely on having energy at our finger tips: our society is built on it. From the warmth and light we rely on at home, and the power which keeps our factories and offices going, to the mobile communications and other infrastructure technologies that are essential parts of our modern lifestyle.
5. That puts National Grid at the heart of one of the greatest challenges facing our society; the creation of new sustainable energy solutions for the future and the development of an energy system that can underpin our economic prosperity in the 21st century.
National Grid—Our Duties
6. Our primary duties are to operate, maintain and develop our networks in an economic, efficient and co-ordinated way and to facilitate competition in the supply and generation of electricity and in the supply of gas respectively. Our licences require us to provide connection to and use of our transmission and distribution networks in a non-discriminatory and transparent way.
7. As an electricity transmission system licence holder National Grid also has a duty placed on it under Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Electricity Act 1989 relating to the preservation of amenity. How National Grid meets this duty is set out in “National Grid’s commitments when undertaking works in the UK: Our stakeholder community and amenity policy”.
National Grid and Planning Reform
8. Given the changing face of energy markets, the commitment to address climate change and the age of National Grid’s transmission assets we need to undertake a substantial amount of new energy infrastructure investment and development. We are therefore a major “consumer” of the planning and consents regime.
9. The Climate Change Act 2008 targets commit the UK to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050, and the EU Renewable Energy Directive requires 15% of all energy to be from renewable sources by 2020. The level of investment needed to achieve this is estimated to be around £200 billion by 2020 in all forms of sustainable energy generation, transmission and distribution technologies—large and small, onshore and offshore, and across the UK. Indeed, the scale of investment proposed by National Grid alone in our RIIO T1 business plan submission to Ofgem in July 2011 for both regulated transmission entities is £30.7 billion for the period 2013–14 to 2020–21.
10. In the context of the sheer scale of the energy challenge, it is important to have a planning system that facilitates the development of energy infrastructure in a timely, economical and responsible manner. National Grid has been a strong supporter of the changes to the planning system that were introduced by the Planning Act 2008. We welcome and support the aim to streamline and consolidate national planning policy outside of the 2008 Act regime via the NPPF.
Key Comments on the Draft National Planning Policy Framework in Response to the Questions Identified by the Committee
11. National Grid is broadly supportive of the draft NPPF. It is important to put a clear and stable national framework in place which reflects the Government’s energy policy and provides certainty, efficiency and consistency for all, whilst ensuring the timeliness and quality of decision-making, including appropriate community and stakeholder involvement.
12. Within the context of our support for the general direction of these reforms, there are a number of areas in which further clarification and refinement is required. These areas are covered in more detail in the UKBCSE submission, which we fully support, and will be expanded upon in our response to the consultation by the Department of Communities and Local Government.
Does the NPPF give sufficient guidance to local planning authorities, the Planning Inspectorate and others, including investors and developers, while at the same time giving local communities sufficient power over planning decisions?
(i) Identification of opportunity areas for development
13. The identification of priority areas for economic regeneration, infrastructure provision and environmental enhancement (paragraph 73) and of opportunity areas for renewable and low-carbon energy development (paragraphs 152-153) is welcome and strongly supported. Together with the presumption in favour of development, this will assist the delivery of essential energy infrastructure. However, as currently written, the NPPF could be interpreted that this approach means infrastructure development should only take place in identified priority/opportunity areas but not elsewhere.
14. The NPPF should make it clear that there is no presumption against such development outside of priority/opportunity areas. Proposals outside of identified areas should be judged on the basis of their individual merits against the NPPF, including the presumption in favour of sustainable development, and the relevant up-to-date local and neighbourhood plans.
(ii) Restrictions on development in certain areas
15. National Grid has a duty to preserve amenity and we always seek to avoid, minimise and mitigate the impact of development. However, there are concerns that the NPPF as currently drafted would impose restrictions on development which are more rigid than existing national planning policy. These additional restrictions could undermine the provision of essential sustainable energy infrastructure. The concerns relate particularly to the proposed provisions in respect of:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
16. We refer the Committee to and fully support the detailed comments in the UKBCSE submission in respect of these matters. We would like to emphasise the concerns about the proposed wording relating to energy infrastructure development in the Green Belt. Paragraph 146 of the draft NPPF states that “When located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development”. There are serious concerns about this statement which seems to be in conflict with Government policy set out in National Policy Statement EN-1, para 5.10.12, which states that “It may also be possible for an applicant to show that the physical characteristics of a proposed overhead line development or wind farm are such that it has no adverse effects which conflict with the fundamental purposes of Green Belt designation.”
17. At a practical level, a presumption against development of energy projects such as overhead lines in the Green Belt could have significant negative implications. Most of the major urban areas in the country are surrounded by Green Belt. A policy under which overhead line development in the Green Belt is considered inappropriate could prevent necessary reinforcements and connections into our major urban areas. This could clearly have major impacts on the electricity supply and growth opportunities in those areas.
18. In light of this, the NPPF should not impose restrictions on development in designated areas which are more rigid than existing national planning policy. In particular, the provisions in relation to sites protected under the Birds and Habitat Directives, Local Green Spaces and the application of Green Belt policy to energy infrastructure projects need to be revised for consistency with existing national planning policy, including in the energy National Policy Statements (NPSs).
(iii) Relationship between Neighbourhood Plans and Local Plans
19. The requirement in paragraph 50 of the draft NPPF that Neighbourhood Plans “must be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the Local Plan” is strongly supported, as is the statement that “Neighbourhoods will have the power to promote more development than is set out in the strategic policies of the Local Plan.” However, for clarity, there should be an explicit statement that the Neighbourhood Plans cannot promote less development than set out in the Local Plan.
20. The second sentence in paragraph 51 of the draft NPPF states that “When a neighbourhood plan is made, the policies it contains take precedence over existing policies in the Local Plan for that neighbourhood, where they are in conflict.” This statement would appear to be in conflict with the overarching requirement that Neighbourhood Plans must be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the Local Plan.
21. In order to ensure clarity and consistency between Local and Neighbourhood Plans:
there should be an explicit statement that Neighbourhood Plans can promote more but not less development than set out in the Local Plan; and
the second sentence in paragraph 51 of the draft NPPF should be deleted as it is in conflict with the requirement that Neighbourhood Plans must be in general conformity with the Local Plan.
(iv) Ensuring a smooth transition
22. Whilst the slimming down of national planning policy is supported in principle, there is concern that the major reworking of the established national policy framework will inevitably create some uncertainty, including as to how the new policy compares to/is different from existing policy. There is a risk that this will be played out on a case-by-case basis via planning appeals/inquiries and judicial reviews which will each interpret the NPPF and apply it to planning practice.
23. In order to aid transition to the NPPF regime and to reduce uncertainty and delay, the Government should set out clearly what policies are changes from the existing national planning policy and also what has not changed. This could reduce the need for time-consuming interpretation of the new Framework and how it differs from existing policy.
Is the relationship between the NPPF and other national statements of planning-related policy sufficiently clear? Does the NPPF serve to integrate national planning policy across Government Departments?
(v) Relationship between the NPPF and the planning regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects
24. It is of vital importance that the NPPF and the planning regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) are well aligned and that the relationship between the two regimes is clear. The NPPF should support the delivery of the Government’s objectives and policy in relation to NSIPs as set out in the NPSs.
25. The NPPF should provide greater clarity about the relationship with the NSIP regime. In order to achieve this, the NPPF should state particularly that:
NPSs are the primary basis for decisions on NSIPs (as set out in the NPSs);
NPSs are likely to be a material consideration in decision making on applications that fall under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Whether, and to what extent, NPSs are material considerations will be judged on a case by case basis. This would be in line with similar wording in the designated energy NPSs; and
NPSs should be taken into account in the preparation, alteration and review of local and neighbourhood plans.
Conclusions
26. In the context of the scale of the energy challenge, it is important to have a planning system that facilitates the development of energy infrastructure in a timely, economical and responsible manner. National Grid welcomes the objectives of streamlining and consolidating national planning policy and we are broadly supportive of the draft NPPF.
27. Within the context of our support for the general direction of these reforms, we have identified a number of areas in which further clarification and refinement is required. These areas are covered in more detail in the UKBCSE submission—which National Grid fully supports—and will be expanded upon in our response to the consultation by the Department of Communities and Local Government.
28. Full, effective and judicious implementation of these changes will be crucial to the timely delivery of the necessary investment programme to ensure continued security of energy supply and the creation of a low-carbon economy.
September 2011