Planning white paper poses as many questions as it presents solutions

Planning, 15 June 2007

The RTPI gets plenty of mentions in the planning white paper. But does this mean it is a document that we can all welcome?

In a week when white papers were also published on energy and waste not so long after those for local government and marine policy were issued, it seems busy times are head for the RTPI policy team. Add to that Gordon Brown's pronouncement on eco-towns and it is clear that planning has rarely been more central to the government agenda.

In the devolved nations, new administrations and coalitions will soon be reviewing the effectiveness of recent changes to their planning systems and the effect of local elections will also impact on practice.

How should the RTPI respond to these changes? Much groundwork was done during the run-up to the white paper, starting with the effective joint workshop run with the DCLG in January, and subsequent negotiations with the institute helped to shape the content.

Nowadays the RTPI is better equipped than ever to draw on the expertise of its membership. The general assembly and its committees have already debated a number of the pertinent issues and teams of experts in our networks and associations can co-ordinate opinion.

In areas such as marine planning there is a task group that has direct access to the team shaping legislation, while in Scotland and Wales there are panels in regular contact with executive officers, advising on policy development. We also have a member representing RTPI South West at the regional spatial strategy examination in public.

So what of the white paper itself and why is it necessary fewer than three years after the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004? Depending on your point of view, it is about unfinished business, catching up with a rapidly changing world or an admission of an over-engineered piece of legislation that must be made workable. In truth, it is a combination of all of these.

Major infrastructure represents an issue that has needed tackling for many years. Governments have always decided on the location of projects but their influence has been disguised by a tortuous process. The proposal to simplify and shorten the decision-making process is welcome, while the commitment to produce national policy statements is directly in line with the RTPI's views. That said, the process needs to be clear and democratic and the framework must comprise a coherent set of spatially explicit policies.

The continued commitment to Planning Aid and support for planning education is hugely welcome, as is the proposal for the senior status of chief planning officers in local government. The idea of linking core strategies ever more closely to sustainable community strategies is also a sensible one and procedural burdens on local development framework teams will be eased by some common sense proposals.

There are, however, still questions about the abandonment of the needs test and the plan-led presumption in favour of development, which need detailed attention in subsequent documents. Development management teams like to believe that they will be relieved of minor applications, but I await the reaction of local councillors and amenity groups. One vital need is to ensure that local planning authorities are substantially better resourced. The relaxation of fee levels is unlikely to achieve this, but perhaps the local government bill will find another way.

But the white paper does little about the housing crisis. This cannot be solved by more and quicker plan production, although both are urgently required. However much land is allocated, it is never going to be in the house builders' interests.

Neither is it their responsibility to construct all the affordable homes we need. This will only be achieved by giving organisations such as Communities England and registered social landlords the resources and powers to become more effective public housing developers.

Finally, the paper shows a lack of courage in dealing with the stranglehold that green belts have on many conurbations. While the policy of urban containment is applied rigorously it is impossible for big cities to grow sustainably without breaching the belts and rethinking more than just their boundaries.

Jim Claydon is RTPI president.