Written evidence submitted by RenewableUK
(LOCO 087)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 This evidence to the Communities and Local
Government Committee inquiry into Localism is provided on behalf
of RenewableUK.
1.2 RenewableUK is the trade association for
the UK's wind wave and tidal energy industry. We have over 640
corporate members engaged in all elements of the industry, including
all of the UK's energy utilities, independent renewables developers,
international manufacturers and a wide range of tertiary services
including the environmental, legal, financial and supply-chain
sectors.
1.3 The renewable energy industry is vital to
the UK's future prosperity. This sector will provide the backbone
of the UK's low-carbon economy and will enable significant employment
growth in areas of the UK economy which has been hit hard in recent
years such as large scale manufacturing, civil, mechanical and
electrical engineering. The growth of this sector is therefore
vital to the UK's economic, social and environmental well-being.
1.4 Today our members have over 5 gigawatts of
operational wind capacity installed across the UK, with almost
80% of this capacity provided by onshore wind farms. The UK has
a further 16 gigawatts of onshore and offshore wind capacity either
consented or currently under construction. The anticipated development
pipeline is also extensive, with an additional 7.5 gigawatts of
onshore wind currently awaiting determination in the UK planning
system.
1.5 This submission of evidence focuses on the
practical application of localism within the planning system,
areas within the planning system that may benefit from further
decentralisation and the oversights and safeguards that will be
required and the limits to cutting costs in planning services.
This response addresses these issues specifically in relation
to renewable energy.
2. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
¾ In order
to minimise continued planning uncertainty and minimise additional
costs the Government must be clear in its proposed changes to
the current planning system and introduce clear transitional arrangements
at the earliest possible stage in order to avoid a prolonged and
damaging hiatus in the development of vital national energy infrastructure.
¾ We believe
that there are a number of ways in which Government can reduce
the costs of planning. Possible reductions include reducing the
number of statutory consultees in the planning system, the creation
of a new national or area based expert team to support and advise
Local Planning Authorities in their decision making on complex
applications such as renewable energy and low-carbon energy developments,
and further consideration of the Killian Pretty Review recommendations.
¾ The
absence of renewable energy targets, following the revocation
of RSSs does not assist the Government in the meeting the UK's
overall targets and European obligations. RenewableUK believe
that there may be significant benefit in devolving responsibility
for meeting national renewable energy targets down to the county
level. To support this, it would be most constructive to incentivise
Local Planning Authorities to incorporate national renewable energy
targets in local plans. This should be done in consultation with
key stakeholders, including energy developers and communities.
¾ RenewableUK
supports the development of realistic and workable policies designed
to increase the benefits to local communities from wind developments.
We also welcome the Government's commitment to allowing business
rates to be retained at the local level.
¾ In order
to ensure effective oversight of planning service delivery, it
is important that the necessary safeguards are retained within
the local plan—and policy making framework. It is important
that locally produced policy is consistent with and not contradictory
to any national planning policy statement.
¾ The
Government must carefully consider how a reformed planning process
will ensure that plans are prepared in a smooth and timely fashion,
while also ensuring that robust evidence bases to support plan-making
be maintained.
¾ In order
to effectively measure delivery against overarching objectives,
effective monitoring of Local Planning Authority performance must
also be put in place.
¾ The
role of the planning system in balancing local and national interests
is a fundamental principle of our planning framework. Issues such
as sustainable development and climate change that have overarching
implications need to be addressed through both national and local
policy initiatives. It is currently unclear as to how this will
interact with the localism agenda.
¾ In successfully
balancing local and national needs within the planning system,
the system must be sufficiently robust to accommodate cross boundary
issues. The Government should carefully consider the integration
of strategic planning issues within a new planning system, in
order to ensure that locally determined solutions do not risk
jeopardising national obligations.
¾ RenewableUK
strongly recommend that Local Economic Partnerships be given strategic
planning functions.
3. LOCALISM,
DECENTRALISATION AND
THE ENGAGEMENT
OF LOCAL
PEOPLE IN
PLANNING
3.1 The industry understands the Government's
commitment to devolving decision-making on local issues to the
lowest possible level. It is therefore understandable that the
planning system is considered as a prime area for reform, in seeking
to provide local people with greater say over what development
takes place in their local geographical area.
3.2 This objective is not new however, and it
is one that has been tried repeatedly by successive governments
over the last 30 years. The major planning reforms introduced
by the previous Government were themselves driven in large measure
by the desire to make the development plan-making and decision-making
process more open, inclusive and transparent. Greater focus on
the quality and quantity of public consultation—at both
the plan-making, application and pre-application stages—have
been embraced by both the planning profession and the wider development
sector. Indeed, much work has been done over the last decade to
try and enable disenfranchised and "hard to reach" communities
to engage in local planning issues ranging from area "Masterplans"
through to street-by-street traffic calming measures.
3.3 None-the-less, great variations are experienced
in the extent to which different segments of the population are
willing to engage in planning issues within their localities.
Clearly some communities will seek to take full advantage of the
opportunities that a localism agenda may bring, while other less
prosperous or organised communities may not be sufficiently motivated,
informed or have the time available to effectively engage in Localism
as it relates to planning.
3.4 While we welcome the spirit of localism,
we therefore strongly caution against the wholesale review and
restructuring of the planning system in seeking to deliver greater
say to local communities.
4. LOCALISM,
DECENTRALISATION AND
COST EFFICIENCIES
IN PLANNING
4.1 RenewableUK believe that there may be a number
of ways in which the Government can reduce the costs of planning
delivery, while maintaining standards of service, enabling further
public engagement and retaining developer confidence.
4.2 We suggest that the number of statutory consultees
in the planning system be reviewed, as we consider there to be
significant potential to reduce the number of statutory consultees
through a consolidation of existing organizations, in order to
minimize unnecessary costs incurred in the duplication of effort
when considering applications. RenewableUK also recommend that
the Government consider setting timeframes for responses from
these statutory consultees, as we believe that the introduction
of limited timeframes may help to ensure speedy and efficient
delivery of local planning and decision making alongside the ability
of the Local Planning Authorities to assume deemed consent if
statutory consultees do not respond in these set timeframes.
4.3 In addition, RenewableUK suggest that there
may be an opportunity to establish a national or area based expert
team to support and advise Local Planning Authorities in their
decision making on complex planning application such as renewable
energy, and low-carbon energy developments. The creation of such
expert teams would enable the concentration of expert resource,
and would reduce the need for comprehensive training programmes
to be rolled out across a wide range of staff and across all Local
Planning Authorities; thereby making the most effective use of
training budgets while improving the efficiency of low-carbon
energy deployment across the UK.
4.4 There may also be further potential for streamlining
of the existing planning system, and we suggest that some of the
points raised in the recent Killian Pretty Review into Planning
be looked at again. For example, we recommend that the Coalition
Government review the amount of information now required to accompany
a planning application. The level of detail is somewhat onerous.
4.5 However, it is important to recognise that
planning delivery for renewable energy development is already
a lengthy and complex process. Significant delays are usually
experienced through the current planning system for projects,
hindering major investment that will help us out of recession.
Planning resources need to be enhanced at the local level and
investment is needed to support Local Planning Authorities in
taking complex decisions and developing policy on renewable energy.
RenewableUK is seriously concerned that there is currently insufficient
capacity within local authorities to effectively introduce new
plans without causing serious disruption to the decision-making
process, given the staff cut backs that have taken place over
the last two years within Local Planning Authorities.
4.6 Therefore it is important that the limits
of localism and decentralization in delivering cost efficiencies
in the planning system are understood. Changes to the legislative
framework are very likely to incur additional costs; firstly in
terms of the additional time and money spent by planning staff
in re-writing plans, programmes and policies and secondly, in
terms of the additional time and financial costs incurred by developers
in postponing development proposals while these new plans and
policies are established.
4.7 Often the greatest costs incurred during
periods of change in planning policy and/or legislative reform
result from increased market uncertainty. All changes in the planning
framework create uncertainty, within high levels of market uncertainty
resulting in greatest market costs. Market uncertainty may also
result in wider social and economic costs as a consequence of
declining inward investment, including postponed and cancelled
projects and even job losses, if the market contracts.
4.8 Following the revocation of Regional Spatial
Strategies, the impacts of this uncertainty are already being
felt by planning officers who are delaying the determination of
applications at the local level, and by applicants who are holding
back on the submission of planning applications. In order to minimise
continued uncertainty and therefore reduce costly planning delays,
the industry urgently requires specific guidance as to how schemes
will be determined during the period of transition while new,
locally derived plans are prepared and independently examined.
The Government must put transitional arrangements in place for
strategic-level planning that co-ordinates development and infrastructure
between different areas, provides a wide range of environmental
policies, provides a basis against which to consider development
and ensures that the needs of the wider than local community are
properly addressed.
4.9 This clarity is required both in terms of
the local planning system, and in terms of the system for the
determination of nationally significant infrastructure projects
(NSIPs). Guidance is therefore urgently required as to how NSIPs
will be considered while the transition is made from the Infrastructure
Planning Commission to the Major Infrastructure Unit within the
Planning Inspectorate. It is crucial that transitional arrangements
at all levels of the planning system are introduced at the earliest
possible stage in order to avoid a prolonged and damaging hiatus
in development which will stall economic recovery and risk under-delivery
of vital green energy infrastructure.
4.10 RenewableUK therefore strongly caution against
the wholesale review and restructuring of the planning system
as a means of cutting costs in public service delivery.
5. LOCALISM,
DECENTRALISATION
AND
REFORM
OF
THE
PLANNING
FRAMEWORK
5.1 A number of changes, including the revocation
of Regional Spatial Strategies (RSSs) and the proposed development
of a National Planning Framework (NPF) have already been announced
by the Government. These changes raise a number of questions regarding
the form and content of any future planning framework in England,
and the relationship between national objectives and local concerns.
5.2 The revocation of the RSSs[37]
and their eventual abolition through the Decentralisation and
Localism Bill will create a de facto single tier planning system
below the proposed National Planning Framework. However, the current
system of RSSs and Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) was not
designed to operate as a single tier system, and it is questionable
whether the current LDF system is still "Fit for Purpose".
The revocation of RSSs has also resulted in the removal of the
renewable energy targets contained within these strategic planning
documents. This policy gap is now having an adverse affect on
planning decisions for onshore wind farms as the need for renewable
energy development within a given area now holds reduced weight
in the planning balance.
5.3 In order to address this policy gap, RenewableUK
suggest that the Government consider devolving responsibility
for meeting national renewable energy targets down to the county
level. To support this, it would be most constructive to incentivise
Local Planning Authorities to incorporate national renewable energy
targets in local plans. This should be done in consultation with
key stakeholders, including energy developers and communities,
and using the existing assessments of potential renewable and
low carbon energy capacity that have been done to date at the
regional level. Under a new National Planning Framework, guidance
should be given to local authorities to have regard to national
renewable energy policy, targets and the NPSs, so that local decisions
are made in the context of national need. Sensible time limits
should be placed upon the production of strategic renewable energy
plans/targets so that development is not hindered during their
production.
5.4 In looking afresh at the wider planning framework,
the scale of plan making should be further considered. While there
has been some discussion regarding possible approaches to the
scale and coverage of local plans, it is not clear as to the scale
of plans that are envisaged and whether these plans will be developed
at a District or Unitary level. Consequently it is unclear as
to whether Local Development Frameworks will continue or whether
there will be a return to the preparation of more area specific
plans, such as town-based plans and/or Area Action Plans. In the
absence of any regional or strategic framework, this is a real
concern, and particularly given the reduced resources that will
be available to local government.
5.5 The importance of consistent plan periods,
both in terms of starting base dates and end dates, to the effective
operation of the planning system should not be overlooked or underestimated.
Consistent plan periods are important for the monitoring and implementation
of plans. The revoked RSSs covered the period to 2026. Any new
style plans will need to have a reasonable time horizon post adoption
and be subject to regular review. The current system seeks a 15
year period post adoption. Phasing, monitoring and review should
be tied to a five yearly cycle linked to the 2026, 2031 and 2036
time horizons.
5.6 If a more flexible and responsive planning
system is sought then a realistic and robust plan making process
and timetable is required. Previous plan making of both Local
Plans and Local Development Frameworks has been poor. Poorly performing
local planning authorities have not been adequately brought to
account. The Government must carefully consider how a reformed
planning process will ensure that plans are prepared in a smooth
and timely fashion.
5.7 A welcome component of the current LDF system
is that it is evidentially based. Whilst some may criticise the
extent to which local planning authorities have gathered evidence
instead of advancing their plan making, for fear of having their
plans found "unsound" by the independent LDF Planning
Inspectors, it is nonetheless important that the new "Localism"
system is evidentially based. Planning Policy Statement 12 Local
Spatial Planning para 4.37 emphasises the fact that "It is
essential that core strategies are based on thorough evidence.
The evidence base should contain two elements: participation…..
and research fact finding." RenewableUK believes it essential
that Local Authorities continue to gather their evidence bases,
including those on the potential for the local authority area
to accommodate renewable energy generation capacity.
5.8 Another concern is the inter-relationship
and co-ordination of large scale infrastructure projects with
local plan making. For example large scale energy projects, such
as the next generation nuclear power stations or renewable energy
facilities may not be popular in some areas but there may be particular
locational factors which determine site selection.
5.9 In terms of Development Management, RenewableUK
understands that the Coalition Government intends to pursue the
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and S106 approach advocated
by the previous Government. However, it is unclear how local planning
authorities will determine their CIL requirements in circumstances
where any new plans have yet to identify their social and physical
infrastructure requirements.
5.10 RenewableUK supports the development of
realistic and workable policies designed to increase the benefits
to local communities from wind developments. We recommend that
there be significant flexibility in the nature of the community
benefit, agreed on a case-by-case basis between the developer
and local stakeholders. In addition, we welcome the Government's
commitment to allowing business rates to be retained by the local
community where renewable energy installations are consented locally.
6. ENSURING
EFFECTIVE
OVERSIGHT
OF
PLANNING
SERVICE
DELIVERY
6.1 The Government Offices currently scrutinise
the emerging LDF documents. With the demise of the Government
Offices, it is unclear as to who will ensure that the early stages
of plan preparation will be undertaken in accordance with national
planning policy. If this role were to revert back to the Council,
the industry believes that there is a real risk that such scrutiny
will not be undertaken to the current level, with a corresponding
risk that national policy objectives will prove harder to deliver
at the local level. There is also a need for clarity as to how
cross boundary issues will be addressed.
6.2 RenewableUK is also aware that the Government
is currently reviewing the role of the Planning Inspectorate in
the local plan-making process. We have significant concerns regarding
any reduction in the degree of oversight provided by the inspectorate
in assessing the quality of local plans and believe that the future
of "Binding" Inspector's Reports should be thoroughly
considered before a decision is taken on whether or not to abandon
this aspect of plan making.
6.3 The underlying reasons as to why binding
inspector's reports were previously introduced should be carefully
and specifically considered. The previous system contained a "Modifications"
stage post inquiry and the publication of the Inspector's report.
This stage was often time consuming and generated sometimes several
sets of proposed modifications which then got "caught up"
and therefore delayed in the months before local elections. Sometimes
the process generated a need for a second Local Plan Inquiry.
The removal of this stage was intended to expedite overall plan
preparation. Furthermore, the binding reports give greater certainty
to the development industry that Inspector's Recommendations'
would be accepted.
6.4 The Coalition Government's intention to remove
the "binding" element of the Inspector's report is already
causing delays in the process. Removal of the binding report will
result in further delays and uncertainty; with the potential for
some local authorities to do as they please with impunity.
6.5 Notwithstanding the above concern, we consider
there to be a need for additional penalties for existing non-compliance
in the plan-making process. As stated above, many Councils have
a poor track record of plan preparation, with some local authorities
seemingly finding it impossible to produce an adopted plan. According
to latest PINs statistics only 20% of Local Planning Authorities
have a sound Core Strategy. Whilst the emerging details of the
incentives are noted, it is clear that the new system will need
effective "Sticks" as well as "Carrots". The
penalties for not maintaining an up to date development plan must
be clear and enforced.
6.6 In terms of the Development Management process,
the current planning system operates in accordance with Section
38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 whereby
"where the development plan contains relevant policies, applications
for planning permission should be determined in line with the
plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise".
Forthcoming legislation will be required to clarify whether S38
(6) is to be refined, replaced or abandoned.
6.7 A locally prepared development plan could
fulfil this role provided it has been subject to appropriate public
participation; it has been examined by an independent Inspector
and is consistent with the forthcoming National Planning Framework
and/or other extant national planning policy and guidance. Without
a clear need for local plans to be in broad compliance with national
policy, there is real concern as to how the Planning Inspectorate
will arbitrate in the appeal process on individual applications.
6.8 RenewableUK also consider it essential that
requirements for effective monitoring of Local Planning Authority
performance are put in place. We believe that it is vital that
decision-making on renewables projects be regularly monitored,
in order to establish progress against our UK renewable energy
commitments. This could be delivered through placing requirements
on Local Planning Authorities to effectively monitor local renewables
deployment and appropriate use of central funds for energy/planning/climate
change purposes.
7. BALANCING
LOCALISM
WITH
NATIONAL
INTERESTS
IN
PLANNING
REFORM
7.1 As stated above, the role of the planning
system in balancing local and national interests is a fundamental
principle of our planning framework. Issues such as climate
change that have overarching implications need to be addressed
through both national and local policy initiatives.
7.2 The industry has real concerns about how
the principles of localism will interact with the principles of
sustainable development and move to address issues of climate
change. While Open Source Planning page 11 states support for
sustainable development and a belief that "it is right
and proper that the system be underpinned by a predisposition
in favour of sustainable development", it is unclear
as to either how or whether sustainable development will be defined
at the local level.
7.3 The absence of renewable energy targets,
following the revocation of RSSs does not assist the Government
in the meeting the UK's overall targets and European obligations.
Renewable energy development is in many ways strategic infrastructure
in nature - it owes its existence to a national need for energy
supply, and it comes forward as a direct response to the need
to meet national climate change objectives. It doesn't usually
come forward in response to local needs, either for energy supply,
or for housing or employment or other local economic drivers.
None-the-less, on a national level, renewable energy is acknowledged
to be needed as a priority.
7.4 It is important that locally produced policy
is consistent with and not contradictory to any national planning
policy statement. It is currently unclear however, as to how conflicts
between policies will be resolved in the potential absence of
"Binding" Inspector's Reports, as discussed above. The
future role of the Secretary of State, in terms of exercising
reserve powers in respect of individual applications, is also
unclear. Should local policy conflicts increase, the planning
system may find itself increasingly reliant on the Secretary of
State's reserve powers of determination.
7.5 In successfully balancing local and national
needs within the planning system, the system must therefore be
sufficiently robust to accommodate cross boundary issues. Many
planning issues, including infrastructure development of all kinds,
can be "Larger than Local" in scale and there remains
a robust case for some form of strategic sub-regional planning
within the reformed planning system in order to facilitate strategic
development. RenewableUK believes that the Government should carefully
consider the integration of strategic planning issues within a
new planning system, in order to ensure that locally determined
solutions do not risk jeopardising national obligations.
8. CONCLUSION
8.1 We welcome and understand the Government's
interest in devolving power to local communities. RenewableUK
supports the development of realistic and workable policies designed
to increase the tangible benefits to local communities from wind
developments. We recommend that there be significant flexibility
in the nature of the community benefit, agreed on a case-by-case
basis between the developer and local stakeholders. We very much
welcome the Government's commitment in this regard to allowing
business rates to be retained within the local communities where
renewable energy installations are developed.
8.2 We believe that there is potential for cost
reduction in a number of areas, through the consolidation of functions
and of expertise, in order to make the most effective use of training
and resource. We also believe that the effective operation of
the local plan system would benefit from greater emphasis on consistent
plan periods and robust timeframes within which plan consultation,
evidence gathering and policy development should take place.
8.3 At the local level, we believe that it may
be appropriate to devolve responsibility for meeting national
renewable energy targets down to the county level, supported with
incentives from both industry and Government encouraging Local
Planning Authorities to incorporate national renewable energy
targets in local plans.
8.4 There will however remain a need for planning
and policy development at a strategic level, above that of the
individual local authority or Local Enterprise Partnership. Renewable
energy development, including onshore wind farms, is in many ways
strategic infrastructure in nature; it owes its existence to a
national need for energy supply, and it comes forward as a direct
response to the need to meet national climate change objectives.
October 2010
37 Secretary of State Letter
27 May 2010 Back
| 
