Clause 17 - Statement of community involvement
Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill
4:00 pm
Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Harrow East, Labour)
It is clearly about the process by which the community, which I shall define in a moment, has an input into the development of planning documents in the local development framework and the decision-making process of the local planning authority. It is therefore about how the community can be involved, which is why—funnily enough—it is called a statement of community involvement. It is not about a specific interpretation of local, national or regional policy by the local community, however that is defined, or by the local planning authority. It is a process and a structure through which local people can be engaged in the planning process, and bring with them their own interpretation of specific policies, whether national, regional or local.
It would, however, be wholly inappropriate for the London borough of Harrow or the London borough of Barnet, or any other borough, to say in their statement of community involvement something along the lines of, ''We have determined that we will have nothing to do with Mayor Livingstone's London plan, so if the community supports that plan, we will disregard anything that it wants to say in relation to
the gestation of local development documents or the development control process.'' That sort of specific, policy-focused element should have no part in the statement of community involvement. The SCI is a part of a process to empower and unlock people's ability to get involved and participate in both ends of the planning process.
Amendment No. 292 raises the issue of whether a local planning authority can set out its policies for involving businesses in the preparation of local development documents and in—to refer to it in shorthand—the development control and planning permission function. I assure the hon. Member for Spelthorne that the term ''person'' encompasses bodies, organisations and businesses as well as individuals. I also assure him that local authorities, in preparing their local development documents, will consult businesses along with other particular groups, as they are encouraged to do now through PPG 12. They are also encouraged to do that in ''Making Plans''—a jazzy little document about ''Good Practice in Plan Preparation and Management of the Development Plan Process.'' That document includes private businesses, local voluntary and community groups and local people among those groups that the Government expect local planning authorities to consult.
I endorse, in general terms, what the hon. Gentleman said about businesses. The notion that those engaged in business or economic activity in a particular local or regional economy have no role to play in the determination of the future in planning or in other aspects is absolute nonsense. That does not afford the business sector any more or less legitimacy than any other element of the community to voice a view or play a role in the local planning world, but it is beyond doubt that the business community and those engaged in economic activity in a particular area should have a role.
I deprecate the suggestion that there is something fishy or suspicious about those who run businesses or are engaged in economic activity becoming involved in or having concern for their local area: that area is, after all, their local economic base and their local market. The business community anywhere in the country is an important part of the wider community and should be treated as such, and in the context of SCIs, that will be the case.
Amendment No. 200 would make express provision for every SCI to cover residents of the authority's areas. As currently drafted, the clause requires the SCI to set out the authority's policies on involving
''persons who appear to the authority to have an interest in matters relating to the development in their area.''
Amendment No. 201 would specify that it should cover persons who appear to the authority to have an interest in
''the area covered by the development scheme.''
I have already explained at some length how the SCI will operate and what we intend that it should specify, and I hope that I will, in your judgment, Mr. Pike,
have pre-empted a clause stand part debate. I am, however, happy to confirm that the residents of an authority's area will be covered in the regulations setting minimum standards for community engagement in consultation and participation. We also intend to encourage authorities, through guidance, to set out in their SCI what more they will do in that respect. Under clause 18(2)(a), local planning authorities will be required to have regard for the guidance when preparing their statements of community involvement. Additionally, SCIs will be subject to independent examination, which will provide for the local planning authorities' proposals to be tested. We do not think that amendment No. 200 is required. SCIs will cover the residents of the authorities' areas.
On amendment No. 201, it might help if I explain how the Bill's various provisions fit together. An authority's local development scheme will set out the local development documents that are to be prepared. Taken together, the documents must set out an authority's policies, however expressed, relating to the development and use of land in its area. The statement of community involvement will set out the authority's policies on involving the community in the preparation of its local development documents.
Those provisions mean that there is no doubt that all an authority's area will be covered by the local development documents and that an authority's entire area will be covered by the statement of community involvement. I confirm that there will be only one statutory statement of community involvement. Authorities might wish to set out different policies for different local development documents. They will be underpinned by the minimum standards required by regulation in the SCI.
Amendment No. 231 would give the Secretary of State the express power to issue guidance to local planning authorities on the nature and extent of the community involvement to be provided in a statement of community involvement. As I said, regulations will set out the minimum standards of consultation and participation that will apply to local development documents and they will build on the current arrangements that I mentioned. We have commissioned research from Llewelyn-Davies, which is in the final stage of its research to identify the possible minimum standards and examples of those standards being achieved through real-life good practice. We are well down the line of establishing the regulations, which means that amendment No. 231 is not necessary. For the reasons that I suggested, I hope that the amendment will be withdrawn.