Bill triggers fear on inspectorate's role

Susanna Gillman, Planning, 1 February 2008

The Planning Bill suggests that decisions on major infrastructure go to an independent planning commission (IPC) while minor appeals are determined by local member review bodies (LMRBs).

The creation of the latter would mean that the inspectorate's caseload would be cut by more than a quarter (Planning, 11 January, p2). Figures for 2006-07 indicate that PINS handled 22,700 appeals in that period, of which around 6,000 came from householders.

The RTPI together with former chief planning inspector Chris Shepley agreed that there are substantial implications for the inspectorate.

But the DCLG said there will still be a lot of work for PINS. "The inspectorate will be able to focus on more complex cases," a spokesman claimed.

"At the moment, it costs around £30 million a year to run. Taking minor appeals out to leave experts to focus on more complex decisions will reduce costs," he said.

He added that the transferral of major projects to the IPC will have a small impact because it will only deal with around 45 cases a year.

Speaking at a Planning Bill committee session last month, inspectorate chief executive Katrine Sporle maintained that setting up the IPC would not affect PINS significantly.

Meanwhile, the cost of LMRBs, which would be made up of councillors and review officer decisions on minor schemes, has raised concerns. "Members will not be able to just deal with cases. They will need expert advice," Shepley insisted.

The RTPI has already launched a campaign against LMRBs, arguing that they would pose a threat to impartiality. Policy director Rynd Smith agreed that resources could be a problem.

The impact assessment of the Planning Bill estimates that the total costs of setting up LMRBs will be more than £33 million but there will be net savings of £12 million.