Planning Bill is vital for our infrastructure
- Published: 11 June 2008 16:28
- Last Updated: 11 June 2008 16:28
- Reader Responses
The Planning Bill proposes to unblock the planning process, but opposition is strong, says Judith Damerell
New planning legislation has been a relatively rare agenda item in the life of most governments since the original 1947 Planning Act, but since New Labour came into power in 1997 there have been two major and highly controversial pieces of legislation.
The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 is still undergoing teething troubles in its implementation and the current Planning Bill has encountered enormous opposition from a wide range of interest groups and professional bodies.
It was inevitable, in the light of the Barker Report and the Eddington Report, that the Government would feel compelled to intervene to unlock what those studies identified as the blockages in the planning system which inhibit the delivery of the vital infrastructure that Britain in the 21st century will need to maintain its economic competitiveness in a fast-developing world.
This includes the need to secure stable power generation amidst increasing geopolitical turmoil in those areas on which we currently depend for our energy.
It also involves the building of infrastructure, such as airports and motorways, which can give rise to opposition from those living near them.
The current Planning Bill was always going to have a rocky road.
It is seeking to restrict political control of decisions which are made at the specific project level by establishing an Infrastructure Planning Commission to deal with the broad spectrum of consents and -authorisations that are needed to deliver major projects.
To that extent, the project authorisations will be 'de-politicised'.
It is therefore not surprising that difficulties have arisen in the House of Commons, prompted by concerns amongst lobby groups, such as Friends of the Earth, who fear that local communities will have less chance of influencing the consenting processes under the Infrastructure Planning Commission.
Court challenges
That may be part of the Government's intention, because that is one of the key sources of delay in delivering the vital infrastructure that we need. That said, the Government intends to balance public accountability with the creation of effective consenting procedures.
It is not only lobbying groups that have expressed concerns. Several legal experts and judges also fear that the IPC process is likely to result in a dramatic increase in court challenges based on breaches of human rights and environmental legislation - at European as well as at local level.
This Government, facing the political challenges it does, will have its courage and resolve tested virtually to the limit in seeking to push these measures through, tainted as they are by accusations that they are lacking in democracy.
But the desperate, underlying need to answer the infrastructure demands of the whole community remains fundamental to our competitiveness and maintaining our way of life.
Doing nothing is no longer an option.
Judith Damerell is planning group partner at law firm Eversheds
