Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1780
- 1799)
TUESDAY 2 MARCH 2004
YVETTE COOPER
MP, MRS VICTORIA
THOMSON AND
MR ELLIOT
GRANT
Q1780 Mr Meale: I accept that it may
not prove impossible but I think you have to accept that it would
if, say, Pontefract ski slopes were to be adapted to have a casino
licence?
Yvette Cooper: We are not talking
about small-scale developments here, we are talking about major-scale
developments which have an impact on the entire region and not
simply on people who live in Pontefract and Castleford; and it
is right that other people who live in the region, other local
authorities and so on should be involved in the discussion about
location in order to have the most sensible strategic impact.
If it is just a small casino which only has a small market then,
clearly, the considerations are completely different and should
be.
Q1781 Mr Page: Chairman, most of my points
have been answered. Minister, you said the planning system is
used to dealing with large planning applications and so on, and
the planning inquiry is part of that process. I cannot see that
anything you have said is going to avoid an almost automatic public
inquiry for every large resort application. You are going to get
regions arguing with regions and it is going to be called in and
will have to be handled that way. Is that the way you want to
see the planning application process work?
Yvette Cooper: No, I think that
is also why the attempt is to try to change the way that the regional
plan is developed—to try and build those considerations
in at the earlier stage. If people have come to an agreement that
in the Yorkshire part of the regional planning body in drawing
up their regional plan that Ryedale, for example, is an appropriate
location for a casino resort development, or that kind of development,
then that debate has been had; it has been had in public and there
has been an opportunity for everybody to have those discussions,
to argue about what the different merits are, what the consequences
are and to come to an agreement through the regional planning
process. Once you have got a regional spatial strategy which is
then reflected in local development plans it is then possible
for the system to work far more swiftly and far more effectively
for individual applications that then come in and are in accordance
with those plans. You have had the debate, disagreements, discussions
and negotiations at an earlier stage in the process. That is how
you would expect it to work in the long-term. I do not think we
should be in any doubt, however, that as some of these early applications
come along these are going to be new issues. There will be a lot
of things to be considered. It may well be that there will be
planning inquiries and so on, especially at the early stage, when
a lot of these developments are new.
Q1782 Jeff Ennis: On the issue of the
potential for pubic inquiry, it seems to me, Minister, you were
actually saying that all the spadework would be done in the early
part of the process, and that to some extent will then nullify
the possible need for a public inquiry for this type and scale
of development. Is that the case?
Yvette Cooper: I think that is
how you would want it to work in the long-term. We have to be
realistic about what issues would be raised in the short-term.
In any individual case I cannot pre-empt whether a planning inquiry
will be appropriate for a particular case. We have very specific
criteria we use for call-ins, on whether it is departures from
local plans and so on; and we would need to abide by those criteria
for any individual case. You can imagine it would be more likely
that those criteria would be fulfilled, and you would need a planning
inquiry at the earlier part of this process, as this just starts
to get going and these new developments come along, than later
on. Certainly the broad aim of the reforms that we are putting
in place is to try and reduce the need for planning inquiries
across the board by actually having the discussions and debates
at the early stage, rather than later on.
Q1783 Jeff Ennis: We are focussing on
the really big resort developments that have got regional significance
or planned regional significance in some cases. What about the
slightly smaller developments that fall into the 10,000 square
feet category? Do you foresee the need that they will come under
the public inquiry umbrella?
Yvette Cooper: Obviously even
the very small-scale developments can end up going through the
whole process if there is a departure from the local plan, or
if there are particular problems that are thought to have national
implications. For example, if somebody is proposing to put a small
casino in the green belt you can imagine that it would raise a
whole series of planning inquiry issues, just because that is
the way the planning system works, and rightly so. The issue we
are still in discussion with at DCMS is what the dividing line
should be. Clearly, you can imagine that big-scale resorts which
are going to have a massive impact need to fall into the category
of those that should be dealt with at the regional level, and
should be considered as part of the regional spatial strategies
and so on. However, equally, the very small-scale ones should
not, and should simply be dealt with by the local planning authorities
as part of their normal processes. Where I think we have not made
the decision yet is exactly where you draw the line between those
two. There are some quite complex issues here because the planning
system in the end is trying to capture, for the regional trigger,
those cases where you are going to get a lot of people travelling
from all across the region where you are perhaps creating an awful
lot of jobs; but the planning system cannot set out its criteria
on the basis of, "Okay, all those which create more than
a certain number of jobs, all those which have more than a certain
number of people, we will consider as part of the regional process".
You cannot do it that way because that does not provide any sufficient
certainty for the industry as to whether a particular proposal
will be considered through one route or through another. This
is why at the moment in the planning system for retail developments
we have a proxy for that sort of regional impact based on the
level of floor space. We will need to find a proxy in the same
way for the casino resorts. What we have not yet come to a decision
on is exactly what that proxy should be. Should it be the kinds
of measures that are set out specifically in the Bill? Should
it take into account other considerations? What is the appropriate
size? Is it based on the overall floor space of the development,
or on the floor space of the gambling area? All of those sorts
of things are the kinds of details we are still looking at, at
the moment, and need to come to a clear agreement on so that we
provide a very transparent system for the industry to be able
to operate in.
Q1784 Lord Wade of Chorlton: Listening
to what you have said, I am concerned about two things: one, the
timing of all these proposals, and how it will delay the actual
action; and when you say that earlier applications could be taken
through on an inquiry basis, but that longer term you would need
a regional strategic planning basis. Once you have established
one or two on an inquiry basis, how can you then change the policy
later on if you wanted to do it in a different way? Listening
to what you have said, I would have thought you have got a tremendous
amount of work to do in a very short time to actually establish
a regional strategic planning system as quickly as possible. If
your committee has already been sitting for 18 months, it seems
to me that that is a matter which has to be met with some urgency,
because you cannot wait until there is a strategic plan in two
or three years' time to deal with this, because people are going
to want to start investments very quickly. I would have thought
people who are going to benefit will want that as well. I am a
bit surprised that there seem to be an awful lot of options.
Yvette Cooper: The same would
apply to every other major development taking place. This is not
something which specifically applies to casinos. Because we are
trying to change and reform the planning process, there are inevitably
cases that are major developers that are being dealt with at the
moment in advance of regional spatial strategies being drawn up,
that may be dealt with slightly differently once the regional
spatial strategies are in place. I do not think that casinos therefore
are in a particularly different situation from any other major
development. The fact is, we are reforming the planning system
to try and speed it up, to make it more effective, and to try
and have the kinds of debates about strategic locations and so
on to take place in advance rather than at a late stage down the
line. Therefore, there are mechanisms by which early applications
can be dealt with by the existing system. There is no reason why,
once the Bill is in place, somebody wanting to put forward an
application at some speed could not do so under the existing system.
The fact that an individual planning inquiry may be appropriate
for one particular development in one particular place does not
mean it always will in every other development. I am trying to
be realistic in terms of what our expectations should be. A lot
of these early cases are likely to raise a whole series of different
questions, which will have a whole series of impacts. Of course,
it is more likely that at the earlier stages planning inquiries
would take place than some time down the line.
Q1785 Baroness Golding: Following on
Lord Wade's question to you, Minister, the memorandum from the
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister says the likelihood is that
it will take three years for each region to have a revised regional
strategy. Given what you said to Lord Wade, is it not quite possible
that there would be difficulties arising because regional strategies
will not be in a position to talk to each other about planning
applications within their areas and within their regional proposals;
and you could have two big casinos granted very close to each
other which would not be a very good idea?
Yvette Cooper: That is exactly
the kind of consideration a planning inquiry would need to take
into account. If you imagine a particular proposal to develop
a very big casino resort and a planning inquiry was set up, all
of the stakeholders that would be involved in the regional spatial
strategy would be able to put forward their views in terms of
the planning inquiry. Equally, these are the kinds of things that
a secretary of state would have to take into account once the
planning inquiry was finished. The opportunity for all of those
same stakeholders to put forward their views would remain; it
just means it would be done through a slightly different route
than through the route of allowing them to debate the whole regional
spatial strategy, which may not simply include issues around casino
resorts but will include a huge wide range of other issues, which
is why it would take several years for them to get into place.
They have to look at the whole of the employment strategy for
the region; the housing strategy for the region and so on. I think
it is still possible for all of those same issues to be taken
into account; we would just need to ensure that as planning inquiries
and so on consider those things that they do take into account
all of those regional and broader questions in the early stages
too.
Q1786 Baroness Golding: Are you saying
that your Office would have an overall view of where casinos were
going to go?
Yvette Cooper: No, I do not think
that would be appropriate. I do not think we should have a national
view of where casinos should go. It is something that does need
to be decided at the regional level but, clearly, the kinds of
inquiries that end up coming to the secretary of state for final
decision are obviously ones where the secretary of state needs
to take account of all views which have been put forward by the
inquiry and the conclusions of the inquiry, which must take into
account all of those regional considerations. I do not think it
would be appropriate for us to have pinpoints on a map strategy
from a national level as to where a casino should go.
Q1787 Lord Donoughue of Ashton: Minister,
following up your answers to Jeff Ennis, I would like to try and
get a little more precision on language relating to the size and
type of casinos. The Bill refers on to "large" and "small"
casinos but the position paper refers to "large leisure developments",
"the largest casinos", "resort casinos" and
"casinos of regional significance". Are these synonyms,
do they all mean the same thing, or should the draft Bill and/or
associated guidance distinguish between "large" and
"resort" casinos? What are the kinds of casinos you
would envisage, and what are the differences especially in terms
of size from your Department's planning point of view?
Yvette Cooper: What the Bill does
is set out the difference in terms of the different licensing
requirements that need to apply based on size. The Bill sets out
its criteria in terms of small and large, depending on what the
licensing needs are and the way that the licensing system has
to approach it. What we then need to do is to work out how the
planning system needs to deal with different sizes. Obviously
their approach to the planning system, to retail developments
and housing developments, needs to deal with different sizes and
so on. It is a very familiar principle for the planning system
to deal with size and spatial requirements, but what we have not
yet decided is exactly what scale of development needs to be considered
at the regional level in terms of the planning system; and, secondly,
what the best measure is; and exactly what measurements we should
use to categorise it. All I can say to you at this stage is, it
is clearly the case the big large-scale casino resorts should
be considered at the regional level. It is clearly the case that
the small casinos should not be considered at the regional level.
Exactly where we draw the line in between the two we simply have
not yet decided.
Q1788 Lord Donoughue of Ashton: Drawing
the line, I think, is a problem for all of us. When you have drawn
the line and decided what casinos are, say, in a regional dimension,
will they be required to deliver regeneration benefits of regional
significance?
Yvette Cooper: Obviously that
is one of the things that an inquiry or other decision needs to
take into account. It may be that the regeneration impact of a
particular proposal is very considerable. It may be that the regeneration
impact in some areas will actually be quite hard to identify;
that you can identify economic benefits in some sense; and you
can identify job impacts, transport impacts and so on; but specifically
identifying a regeneration impact may be more difficult. It is
certainly the case that when the regional planning bodies are
deciding what the appropriate locations should be for developments,
we would expect them to take regeneration issues into account
when they are deciding what the best location would be. When it
comes to an individual application, and deciding the merits, then
the planning body and the planning authority that has to grant
the application needs to take account of a wide range of things,
including the regeneration impact but also including other issues
like environment, transport and a wide range of other things as
well.
Q1789 Lord Donoughue of Ashton: Can I
just pick up on something you said at the beginning, where you
said the planning system already deals with all such issues. Were
you actually saying that these gambling issues—obviously
they have differences—are basically routine to the planning
system and there is nothing different, nothing special about gambling
other than this regional dimension?
Yvette Cooper: The issue for the
planning system is to do with the impact of any particular development
or proposal on the local area; whether or not it is appropriate
for the local area; so the planning system would look at the environmental
impact, and the number of people travelling; what are the transport
routes, the motorways, the trains, the public transport routes;
it would look at the environmental impact, and sites of natural
beauty and all those sorts of considerations; and employment issues;
a whole wide range of issues. Many of those issues would be the
kinds of things the planning system would consider, whether it
be for a major leisure development, like a ski slope, or whether
it be for a major retail development. There are obviously issues
around late night entertainment, clubs and those sorts of things
which may have other considerations. The issues the planning system
has to take into account are the kinds of issues the planning
system already has to take into account for a whole wide range
of different things; each one would be different; each one would
have different mixes of those issues; so the mix of questions
for a casino may be different from the mix of questions for another
kind of development but the principle is basically the same.
Q1790 Lord Donoughue of Ashton: You have
said, on regeneration, that regeneration is likely to be a desirable
factor but you have not indicated that it will be an absolute
requirement?
Yvette Cooper: We would expect
development of the regional strategy to consider regeneration
when they decide what the best location is for the different developments;
but, at the stage of an individual application, you would expect
them to take into account regeneration and a whole series of other
issues.
Q1791 Lord Donoughue of Ashton: They
would be allowed to ignore regeneration?
Yvette Cooper: They would be allowed
to weigh it up in the balance with everything else.
Q1792 Lord Wade of Chorlton: You refer
to the fact that there is a history of dealing with these issues.
The point is that we all understand the policy of the regional
authority when it comes to supermarkets or big factories because
there has been a history. We do not know anything about how a
region would look and the importance of a casino. Is it not right
for you, as quickly as possible, to get the regionals to actually
define what it is that they are looking for?
Yvette Cooper: There are two separate
issues here. One is that we need to move relatively quickly in
terms of determining the question that I said is still unanswered
for us, which is to do with the size of the casinos that would
be included at the regional level and what would be included at
the local level. That we need to do relatively quickly, and we
are expecting to try and make decisions for the summer on that
particular issue. There is a separate issue about how fast local
areas can bring in their regional spatial strategies. The difficulty
there is that they need to take account not simply of issues around
casinos but also a wide range of other issues—housing, retail
and so on. Inevitably developing a regional spatial strategy is
not something you can do overnight.
Q1793 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: Do
you not think there is an inherent conflict between a policy which
is based on a free market and a policy which seeks to achieve
regeneration?
Yvette Cooper: No, not necessarily.
I think you can always point to tensions between having an unfettered
free market and the planning system; and it is certainly true
that the planning system takes decisions on an everyday basis
about the location of all kinds of developments, rather than simply
having a completely unfettered free market in terms of location
of developments. That has long been the case. It is right that
the planning system should support competitive markets, which
are slightly different from an unfettered free market. I think
it is right that the planning system should attempt to do that.
I think you can use the planning system to support regeneration,
and support competitive markets and regeneration without that
being to the detriment of the economy.
Q1794 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: I have
to say, that is not what witnesses who have come in front of us
have said. They have said if the Government is serious about seaside
regeneration then the free market has to be suspended in that
region; because the investment will not go to the seaside, it
will go to the large centre of the population.
Yvette Cooper: You could probably
have the same sort of discussion about whether or not big supermarkets
should be in town centres or not. An unfettered free market might
allow supermarkets to put all of their new supermarkets on ring-roads
and areas where they had easy access for those who live in the
suburbs to get there by car, and also have a hugely detrimental
effect on the town centre, where all the life moves out of the
town centre and everybody jumps in their cars and goes out to
the ring-road rather than using the town centre. The planning
system has long said that it is a legitimate thing to do to support
location of economic activity in town centres, rather than out
on the ring-road. I think it is simply applying the same sort
of principle as saying, what is the appropriate location for big
new developments in terms of regeneration and wider economic issues.
That is just extending the way in which the planning system already
operates. It is not a new tension here.
Q1795 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: We
have had evidence presented to us in very, very stark terms. I
am still not clear what the Government's position is. Is it saying
that it is prepared to use planning legislation to hold back developments
which would have the effect of preventing the investment going
to depressed seaside resorts, when regeneration is supposed to
be part of the policy?
Yvette Cooper: It is going to
be a matter for individual regions to decide where the appropriate
investment should be. It would certainly be a legitimate decision
for a regional planning body to decide, "We think the appropriate
area for development of a big casino resort should be at the seaside
for the following reasons". We have a big transparent debate
as part of the regional planning process, so it has to be open
for stakeholders, including the industry, to put forward all sorts
of representations and so on.
Q1796 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: Would
your Department be prepared to say that to regional authority?
Yvette Cooper: I think that is
what we have already said. That is a matter for regional planning
bodies to decide.
Q1797 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: DCMS
are saying that it is going to be a free market?
Yvette Cooper: It is a free market
in terms of what the number of casinos should be. There is a process
here and what happens is that the regional planning body takes
their decision about where they think the appropriate development
should be in exactly the same way that they might around a big
retail development like Meadowhall in Sheffield. Exactly the same
sorts of considerations might apply. Equally, a regional planning
body might decide it is not appropriate to have a massive retail
development that had regional impact in Castleford or Ryedale,
whatever, but it is appropriate to have a massive retail development
in Sheffield, in Meadowhall or wherever. Those are the sorts of
things it is perfectly appropriate for regional planning bodies
to decide. It is not specific to casinos; it is the kind of thing
they already are able to decide about big developments, and equally
about housing developments. That is the point I am trying to make
that these are already principles that are implicit in the planning
system.
Q1798 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: It
is not a free market, is it?
Yvette Cooper: It is a free market
in terms of deciding how many there should be; and also it is
still possible as well for applications to come forward that might
be departures from a local plan. I agreed with your supposition
at the beginning when you first asked the question, yes, there
is a tension between an unfettered free market and a planning
system—there is. Those tensions are in-built. My argument
would be that we could equally use the planning system to support
competitive markets, and there is a difference between competitive
markets and an unfettered free market; and also that many of the
principles we are talking about are not new to the casinos, the
casino industry and the location of casino resorts; they are the
kinds of things the planning system already has to deal with right
across the board for all sorts of major developments.
Q1799 Chairman: How much money do you
think we might be talking about in terms of the value of regeneration
projects linked to casinos? We have had evidence which speaks
of £5 billion of investment, with around £2 billion
available for regeneration. Have you come to a view about this
within your Department?
Yvette Cooper: No, and I have
not got figures I could give you that would either substantiate
or refute those figures, because clearly it would depend on the
scale of the kinds of development we are talking about; and what
the additional linkages are.
| 
