Queen’s Speech 2016: Good news for rural England, if ministers follow through
Campaign to Protect Rural England
The Campaign to Protect Rural England offers its analysis of the Queen’s Speech, noting positive signs on neighbourhood planning, but concerns about planning conditions.
Commenting on the Queen’s Speech today, the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) welcomes the ‘primacy’ of neighbourhood plans and the protection of the Green Belt.
It expressed reservations about the ‘liberalisation’ of the planning system however, which it warns could ‘undermine’ local communities and the beauty of the countryside.
The Neighbourhood Planning and Infrastructure Bill appears to put neighbourhood plans at the heart of planning, says CPRE, following detailed discussions during the Housing and Planning Bill.
Tom Fyans, director of campaigns and policy, welcomed the decision: “After ministers pledged to ensure the ‘primacy’ of neighbourhood plans during debates on the Housing Bill, we are very pleased to see neighbourhood planning on the name of the new Bill.
“The Government has clearly committed to empowering local communities in today’s announcements,” he added. “Along with supportive peers and MPs, we now keenly await further detail on how the Government will make the duty to consult neighbourhood planning groups more transparent, and how it intends to improve the process of reviewing and updating plans.”
On infrastructure, head of government affairs, Belinda Gordon, added that giving the National Infrastructure Commission a legal footing could help us plan more effectively for long-term needs, but the commission must not function as an expert black box.
“Infrastructure can make or break a place,” she said. “So we must ensure that communities are fully consulted on the decisions that affect them, and that any new infrastructure leaves not only a lasting impression but a beneficial legacy. We must seek to enhance but also protect our beautiful countryside.”
The CPRE also commended the Bill for emphasising the importance of protecting the Green Belt, but urged ministers not to renege on this commitment.
“Too often has the Government passed the buck on Green Belt protection,” said Fyans. “It is therefore good to see the Government putting Green Belt protection at the top of its housing agenda.
“But we do need to see more action from ministers to make sure that protection actually happens.”
The Bill will, however, propose changes to pre-commencement planning conditions. CPRE fears such changes would mean fewer environmental considerations before development begins.
We are worried that this looks like another attempt to liberalise, rather than localise, the planning system,” said Paul Miner, planning campaign manager at the CPRE.
Of course, local authorities must ensure that conditions are reasonable – but they have no incentive to slow down housing development once permission has been granted. But, we are worried that the Bill could lead to overstretched local authorities throwing in the towel and not insisting that important environmental surveys take place before development goes ahead.
“The Government must make sure that local authorities can always insist on conditions such as archaeological and tree surveys and proper mediation where there is a reason to believe they are needed. These are issues that deserve proper scrutiny from all sides, and especially from developers. Anything less and the support of the local community, and the beauty of the countryside, could be undermined and lost.”
On the Digital Economy Bill, Miner was more positive, arguing that high-speed broadband is “essential to thriving rural communities.”
“Rural communities must have the same opportunities as those in towns and cities,” he said, although new planning rules to “speed up and simplify” the building of mobile and superfast broadband infrastructure “must also address the impact this will have on the countryside.”
“New infrastructure is welcome where it is sensitive to the landscape and avoids damage to natural spaces,” he said. “This can sometimes be done by fixing new masts to existing buildings – such as churches or farm building roofs – provided that their heritage value is considered and protected.”
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
