New clause 26 - Pre-application consultation
Planning and Compulsory Purchase (Re-committed) Bill
4:45 pm
Mr Matthew Green (Ludlow, Liberal Democrat)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
The new clause might, at first, appear not to achieve what I am about to say that I hope to achieve—namely, to speed up the planning system. It might seem so because it appears to add another phase to the planning system for large applications, those requiring environmental impact assessments or any other categories that the Secretary of State would like to add.
I believe that the new clause would speed up the planning system because what slows it down more than anything else is the rejection of applications and the consequent appeals and public inquiries. Nothing is better guaranteed to ensure that a development will grind to a halt than its hitting that process. I understand that in many large-scale developments astute developers ensure that they undertake considerable pre-application consultation—not with the planners only, but with nearby residents and more widely—so that many objections that might be raised can be dealt with before they even submit a plan.
There is therefore a greater likelihood that the planning committee will accept the plan and, as the number of objections has been reduced, the planning committee is far more likely to be minded to accept the application and the officers' advice for it. The applicants in such cases are less likely to find themselves in a position in which they have to appeal to the Secretary of State.
The proposal would also help by reducing both the number of objectors and, perhaps if the development is not in the local plan, the possible grounds of appeal to the Secretary of State, which might give him the reasons for saying that he does not want it called in. It could also reduce the number of chances for a third party to seek judicial review. Although that is not as common, it can still be a problem.
This is not a complex new clause, although it is probably technically imperfect. I wrote it myself without any advice, so I can almost guarantee that. I have never written a new clause without advice. I hope that the Minister will tell the Committee whether the Government are considering the provision as a means of speeding up the process and whether that is a suitable route to go down. I would be only too happy to co-operate with staff at a later stage in the Bill's progress if the new clause is not correctly drafted.
I believe that no study has been done on speeding up the planning process, so I speak largely from anecdotal evidence. I freely admit that. The problem is happening more and more and I believe that it would be in the interests of everyone, particularly the developers, if the new clause were agreed.