§ 11. Mr. AdleyTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to repeal those 826 parts of the Town and Country Planning Act 1947 which give a planning presumption in favour of the developer; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. WaldegraveNo, Sir.
§ Mr. AdleyI thank my hon. Friend for that illuminating and helpful answer. Does he agree that planning needs and environmental attitudes have changed fundamentally since the days of war-ravaged Britain in 1947, when that legislation was introduced? Does he agree also that today's planning law should meet today's requirements and, in particular, should take account of the fact that parts of the country suffer from over-development, not under-development?
§ Mr. WaldegraveThe Town and Country Planning Act 1947 and its successor, the 1971 Act, have stood this country in good stead. They can deliver the kind of planning that we need. It is true that requirements change from time to time. In 1980 the Department issued a circular emphasising the importance of getting planning applications agreed and reminding authorities that they must always grant permission unless there are important reasons for not doing so. Since then we have drawn the inspectors' attention to the importance of taking account of up-to-date plans so that there is no over-development.
§ Mr. Andrew F. BennettThe Minister will be aware of the grave concern in my constituency about the Government's insistence that the Greater Manchester Residuary Body sell off parts of Reddish Vale. Will the Minister give a categorical assurance that if that sale is pushed through planning permission will not be granted for any development that would deny the people of Greater Manchester an important area of rural land that could be used for recreational purposes? Will the hon. Gentleman guarantee that that land will be protected for the walkers, fishermen and others who enjoy it?
§ Mr. WaldegraveIt would be wrong for me to pre-empt a planning application, which should be considered on its merits. I am sure that the important issues which the hon. Gentleman has raised will be taken into account at the proper time.
§ Mr. Andrew MacKayIs my hon. Friend aware that in areas that have suffered from excessive development, such as Berkshire, the democratically elected representatives on the local authorities particularly resent the large number of appeals granted to developers, which give the clear impression that there is a presumption in favour of developers.
§ Mr. WaldegraveThere is a presumption in favour of development—that is the basis of the system. The British system is that people can do what they like with their property as long as an important interest is not damaged thereby. It is a good system. I remind my hon. Friend that more than 50 per cent. of appeals are for residential development and that there is a much lower success rate in such appeals. It is worth drawing that point to the attention of developers because, to some extent, they are overloading the system with appeals, the great majority of which will be turned down.