After a weekend of intense speculation about the future of the planning system– briefly eclipsed by this week’s reshuffle news – the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister announced their proposals for more reform.
Those who remembered last year’s controversy over planning policy were holding their breath in fear that the large measure of consensus we finally reached was going to be unravelled. What did the future hold for England’s Green Belt and the wider countryside?
Today we’re breathing easier. The media headlines focused on making it easier for homeowners to build extensions, but that was only part of the story. There’s a package of financial support for housebuilders and potential homeowners, and a number of proposed changes to planning rules which we judge to be largely neutral in their effect on the natural world.
Secretary of State Eric Pickles made it clear in Parliament that nothing changes in the National Planning Policy Statement or in the importance of the local plan. That’s welcome news.
Local authorities are encouraged to use the flexibility in policy to review their Green Belt boundaries. As Simon Marsh pointed out in his blog last week, that flexibility has always been there in Green Belt policy, and reviewing it from time to time is just part of normal long-term planning. What matters is making sure land in the Green Belt plays its part in giving people access to wonderful places for nature.
There’ll be more detail to peruse in the coming months, but we look forward to working with new planning minister Nick Boles and his colleagues at the Department of Communities and Local Government.
That said, we'll be keeping a close eye on how the £50 billion ring-fenced for infrastructure development gets allocated. Here's hoping there are a few pennies put aside for green infrastructure.
How do you think the Government should spend the £50 billion?
It would be great to hear your views.
there is a massive tidal resource on the Severn and other estuaries; this should be harnessed via lagoons, reefs etc and maybe the occasional small barrage (ie above old Severn bridge to facilitate electrification of rail to Wales); we should not sell this resource to Saudi's... this is a massive predictable resource and it is to our shame that 30 years on we still "debating" this...hopefully an interesting meeting Sep 20 in Bristol here. I will be there. This will be the focus of a possible motion to Labour Conference from Bristol West Labour party if I can swing it; and I would say the omens are good having taken soundings.
Mass programme of insulation of homes, mass eco house building with low cost land release...........off shore wind and wave to drive forward a predictable electricity supply free of rises of carbon price.....
Thanks for this blog Martin, one gets much more information about Government measures that may affect wildlife from your blog and those of other RSPB staff than one ever does from the media. I think the general comment on this issue of relaxing planning regulations, therefore seems to be, OK so far but continue to watch them like a hawk.
As so how to spend the money;
Well it would be great to have another Wallasea Island project as a result of a major non wildlife damaging infrastructure project.
I would like to see more solar power projects, especially as the costs of panels seem to be falling (China exporting to or "dumping in" Europe). Definitely no more wind turbines though less if at all possible.
Research and installation of tidal turbines and wave power projects where they can be shown not to be a hazzard to wildlife but very defintely no barrages.
Grants to charities to up grade their visitor centres would be great, although I doubt if there is enough imagination within Government to consider this.
These are some thoughts but there must be many other environmentally/wildlife friendly examples.