So, the Sunday Times has established what has been widely known for weeks, that the Government's planning policy was strongly influenced by an earlier draft prepared by a group of practitioners, of whom I was one. Actually, this was covered in a piece by the Guardian on 26 July. This will come as no surprise to readers of this blog, since I posted about it on the same day. Since then it's been hard to keep up with the media frenzy, and completely impossible to keep up with the planning blogosphere. We've been concentrating on preparing our detailed response and ongoing discussions with government. Our Chief Executive, Mike Clarke, met with planning minister Greg Clark last week for constructive talks, and we're submitting evidence to two House of Commons committees which are considering the National Planning Policy Framework.
It's worth re-iterating several points in the light of the Sunday Times article. Firstly, that I was acting in a personal capacity on the advisory group, and our draft was not endorsed by the RSPB or any other organisation. It was clear right from the beginning that it was going to be a compromise text.
Secondly, there were some small but significant changes between the practitioners' text and the Government's version, particularly in the detailed wording of the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the extra emphasis given to the strongly pro-growth tone of the policy. For me, that was a step too far.
I believe Greg Clark is genuine in his desire to protect and enhance the natural environment, as he says in the foreword to the NPPF (one part the group definitely didn't write!). The question is whether his policies achieve that, or actually undermine it.
You can step up and support our campaign to secure a planning system that delivers truly sustainable development, not just green wash by emailing Greg Clark: http://tiny.cc/ps7xi