Infrastructure proposals 'could stifle objections'

PlanningResource, 29 November 2007

The DCLG responded to accusations that it was removing the ability for people to have a say on major schemes by inserting clauses into this week's Planning Bill which could lead to an oral hearing.

This will be at the discretion of the infrastructure planning commission (IPC), which will decide how long the hearing will be and what subjects can be discussed. Cross- examination of applicants will be restricted.

Norton Rose head of planning Nigel Hewitson said that this, combined with the six-month limit for the IPC to examine applications, would be seen by many as the government stifling objections.

Objectors will not be able to call a debate on the need for the development, as that will be set out in the national policy statement, which will be subject to public consultation.

Where these statements are location-specific, there will be a duty to consult in those places, communities secretary Hazel Blears said.

DLA Piper partner Howard Bassford said that this would merely transfer controversy around developments from public inquiry to national policy statement stage. 

Other key points on the new system for deciding major infrastructure schemes:

• The IPC will have 20-30 members;
• It will have nine months to decide an application;
• The government wants the bill through Parliament by next summer and the national policy statements done by April 2009;
• Government departments should start work on the statements now;
• There is no timescale for reviewing statements, unless they are deemed out of date.