This week the House of Commons has been debating the Localism Bill for the last time before it goes to the Lords. Maybe more of that in another post.
Today, with rather less fanfare, a draft of the proposed National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) for England was published. It’s no less an important part of the planning revolution than the Localism Bill, and has rather a lot more to say about saving special places. You can find it here.
It’s not an official Government document (yet), but a draft prepared by an independent group of four people invited by planning minister Greg Clark to advise him.
It’s been a novel approach to policy development – pick four people with entirely contrary views, set them the task of streamlining all existing planning policy, give them a small secretariat of civil servants and shut them in a room for five months until they’ve either murdered each other or come up with something useful.
As one of those four people, I’m relieved we didn’t murder each other, and I hope that we actually came up with something useful.
Bearing in mind that I was doing this in a personal capacity, and the RSPB doesn’t necessarily endorse anything in the document, let me offer a few thoughts.
Given the tenor of current Government policy, it is a strongly pro-growth document. There is very positive encouragement for more housing and economic development. In places it is also more strongly pro-localist than might be ideal if we are to meet our national and international commitments to protect and enhance the environment.
It is also not the type of strategic, spatial framework that I and the RSPB have been advocating. If you want more details on that, have a look at the report we commissioned - A Natural Planning Framework.
However (and this is a big HOWEVER), it does a number of things which are important for the natural environment.
Firstly it defines what sustainable development means for the planning system. Alongside the economic and social roles of planning, it states clearly that planning should help tackle climate change and adapt to its effects, protect and enhance our natural and built environment, and use natural resources prudently. Although the NPPF is strongly pro-growth, it recognises that development must not only mitigate significant impacts, but should lever environmental benefits.
There’s been much debate about the so-called ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’. Crucially, the wording of the ‘presumption’ preserves the plan-led system we have at the moment, with a vital caveat that it does not apply if it would cause significant harm to the objectives, principles and policies in the NPPF, which include some important environmental policies.
Local authorities are expected to work together on a number of strategic priorities, which include climate change mitigation and adaptation, landscape and biodiversity protection and enhancement, and, where relevant, coastal management.
In general, the NPPF’s environmental policies are expressed much more simply and succinctly than planning policy is currently. I think they generally retain the same level of protection as current policy, but views on that are welcome.
Let me just highlight three new(ish) areas of policy which will be essential for saving special places, and for tackling climate change.
Firstly, planning authorities should plan for biodiversity at a landscape-scale across local authority boundaries and, as well as the usual site protection policies, should identify and map components of local ecological networks, including designated sites and areas identified by local partnerships for habitat restoration or creation. This will be crucial for delivering the goals of the forthcoming Natural Environment White Paper, expected out very shortly.
Local communities can now use a special ‘Local Green Space’ designation to protect green spaces that are of particular importance to them, perhaps because of its beauty, historic importance, recreational value, tranquillity or richness of its wildlife. Places like this will get similar protection as the Green Belt.
And finally, it gives strong support for renewable energy. Local authorities will have to identify and map opportunities for renewable and low-carbon energy, but take into account both ecological sensitivity and generation potential.
I hope that these very positive policies will make it through to the Government’s own version of the NPPF, which should be published for consultation in July.
Why don’t you be a voice for nature and write in support of these environmental policies?