HC Deb 16 June 1994 vol 244 cc793-9

?After section 29 of the planning Act insert— 29A.—(1) This section shall apply only to Wales.

(2) The Secretary of State shall, after consultation with the Local Planning Authorities concerned, by order designate areas in respect of which the Local Planning Authorities, as and when directed by the Secretary of State, are jointly to prepare guidance for the planning of land-use, transport, economic development and the environment, within those areas.

(3) The timescale for the preparation of such guidance shall be prescribed by the Secretary of State.".' —[Mr. Morgan.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Morgan

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

The new clause relates to the absence of any guarantees in the Bill for the provision of what might be described as strategic planning, including any equivalent to the powers which we expect to be included in the English local government measure and which have already been included in the Scottish one.

The planning subjects that we want the Secretary of State to instruct the incoming unitary authorities to cover jointly are land use, transportation, economic development and the environment. We understand that the new clause meets with the approval of various lobbying bodies with a specialist interest in planning issues, in both rural and urban Wales. The Council for the Protection of Rural Wales is broadly in favour of its thrust because it understands the problems that might arise if we sub-divide the planning of all sorts of issues—including wind farms, which happen to be the burning issue of the moment in rural Wales.

There are many other issues, including the way in which rural Wales—previously a Cinderella area but now rapidly expanding—handles the subject of land use and the change in the environment. Land consisting virtually entirely of national park or areas of outstanding natural beauty is also extremely attractive to the new society into which we are moving, in which people's choice of housing is not necessarily determined by economic activity. Many people now retire at 50 or decide to go for the good life by leaving London and their careers because they think that their children would be better off brought up in a country environment. Those sorts of conflicts need to be resolved.

In urban Wales there is a desperate desire to resolve the question of where the major employment sites will be. A site may be in one unitary authority area, but it may primarily serve a labour market in an adjoining area. Such issues could be more easily resolved if there were a grouping of special subjects involving two, three or more unitary authorities. That would be for the Secretary of State of the day to decide, in consultation with the unitary authorities. They would then have instructions from the Secretary of State to prepare strategic plans on this, that or the other issue, such as the four listed in the new clause —land use, transportation, economic development and the environment.

The Secretary of State will know that this is in no sense an attempt to reconstruct the counties in some sort of shadowy form over the next 20 years. It is very much in the spirit of the provision in the Scottish local government plans for covering strategic planning against the background of the sub-division of Scotland into smaller, single-tier, most-purpose authorities.

We are going through the same process in Wales, but there is a major difference between Wales and Scotland, and the Secretary of State has never justified it. Why is it that his counterpart in Scotland thinks that there is a continuing need for strategic planning to be carried out in agreement between himself and the Scottish local authorities? We are looking for something similar in Wales. We have tabled new clause 17 in that spirit and I commend it to the House.

Mr. Gareth Wardell (Gower)

I am grateful for the opportunity to say a few words in support of the new clause and, in particular, of the part concerned with preparing guidance for the planning of land use.

The Select Committee on Welsh Affairs conducted a detailed study of rural housing in Wales and considered the extent to which existing local authorities were or were not complying with existing local and structural plans.

One of the great problems arises from the fact that the Government have decided to ensure that all district councils prepare new local plans—a process that is now well on course. I am delighted that, at last, after many years, the Government have insisted that those new development plans are drawn up. The great difficulty is that now new plans have to be drawn up by the new unitary authorities, so at the very time when local authorities which have in the past resisted drawing up local plans are busy doing exactly that, the Government have introduced a Bill which will mean that they will have to draw up, on the basis of new boundaries, entirely different plans consisting of two parts—one a strategic plan and the other setting out the details of what is intended for public consultation.

The difficulty that that poses for the Welsh Office and for the Government is very clear: to what extent will they intervene in the internal affairs of a local authority when that local authority plainly does not follow Government guidelines?

When we examined the situation in rural Wales, we came across a few district councils that regarded Welsh Office interference in their affairs as extremely unwelcome and considered that the policy planning guidelines were not there to be acceded to. We questioned officials from the Welsh Office on this matter, particularly in relation to Dinefwr borough council. An answer given by Mr. Gregory in his evidence to the Select Committee on 16 June 1993 was extremely helpful in pointing out the Government's position when the draft plan is being prepared by the local authority—and, in view of the Government's proposals, the new unitary authorities.

I am anxious to explore with the Minister the question that arises from Mr. Gregory's sentence. I realise that that gentleman has moved on to greener pastures and I congratulate him on his move to the Department of Health. At column 195 of the Select Committee report, he said in relation to the way in which draft local plans are being drawn up by district councils:

Our practice is to ask the authority to explain why it is appropriate in these circumstances, since it does not appear to be, and if the authority cannot explain it, and where personal canvassing is the only reason, it is very difficult for them to do so, then either the authority changes the boundary or we enforce a change.". 6.15 pm

What interests me in relation to the Government's proposal is that, when the chief planning officer for the borough of Dinefwr gave evidence in his letter of 6 July 1993, he identified 14 villages within that borough where the local planning committee had decided to overrule the officers' recommendations regarding significant parcels of land that would now be included in the draft local plan for housing development.

Mr. Gregory said that, if the authority continued to proceed in a certain direction, the Welsh Office could be entitled to or could decide to enforce a change. I am interested in the relationship between the new unitary authorities with a new plan and the power of the Welsh Office to enforce that change.

If the local unitary authority is to have the power to determine planning applications with no reference to the county structure plan, will the Welsh Office increase its intervention and its scrutiny of planning in Wales to ensure a consistency across the Principality that plainly did not exist in recent times, as the Select Committee inquiry demonstrated?

The new clause represents an attempt to set up a system which replaces the council city structure plan—which will not exist because the counties will not exist—with a system of checks and balances to ensure some consistency across wider parts of Wales rather than simply within the local authority area.

A fundamental unfairness exists whereby some individuals can get planning permission within a local authority area, entirely against both the local plan and the structural plan, whereas other individuals are unable to get such permission. The clause seeks to address that fundamental issue by trying to establish a system that would help the Welsh Office to avoid the additional burden that any Government Department would attempt to avoid. The clause attempts to ensure that there is fairness within Wales—fairness which, as the Minister knows, did not exist in 1991 when the Select Committee considered the subject in detail.

Is the Minister confident that, under the proposed changes, all the new unitary authorities will have deposited both parts of the new plan by the end of 1996— I refer not to the plans that they have been drawing up but to the new plans—so that there will be some consistency? Secondly, to what extent may we be sure that the Welsh Office will no longer need to watch carefully what each unitary authority is doing in planning terms because checks will exist within them?

It is over-optimistic of the Welsh Office to assume that, if the new clause is rejected, sufficient powers will not only exist but will be used by the Welsh Office to ensure consistency throughout the Principality. We need a replacement for the county structure plan. To rely on the new plans drawn up by district councils without a county structure plan to ensure a fair system throughout Wales will be to create a major problem.

Let me use the analogy of voluntary arrangements among Welsh district councils with regard to waste disposal. The Minister and I spent many happy hours in the Select Committee considering that vexed issue, which took us into consideration of leachate, methane gas and other environmental problems. We also spent many happy hours investigating those problems in situ in different parts of the Principality.

In that instance, there was tremendous inconsistency in the regulation of waste disposal as between district councils. Finally, voluntary agreement was reached between three sets of Welsh district councils, to try to establish a degree of consistency. The difficulties were legendary. I will not describe all 286 landfill sites in Wales that existed in 1987. The majority of district councils were superb in the way that they performed their duties. But some were not. When the voluntary groups existed, certain district councils within them were reluctant to accept from an officer financed by them all instructions as to the action that they should take. I visited some landfill sites and saw leachate entering neighbouring streams; the prosecuting authorities took companies to court and those firms were fined for endangering the life forms in rivers polluted by leachate from tips.

Plainly, the voluntary system did not work. That point applies equally to the provision before us. The Welsh Office needs to play a far more proactive role in carefully examining draft local plans and to use its powers to direct -local authorities not to permit development outside village boundaries contrary to planning guidelines.

I cite the example of policy planning guidance note 7 and annexe E, in respect of bungalows and other homes for retirement farmers in Wales. At present, the Select Committee is devising a questionnaire that will be sent to every Welsh district council asking for details of contraventions of that planning guidance.

We already know that since January 1992, in Montgomery district council, three retired farmers have had new homes built on land that they owned. Will the Welsh Office force those farmers to demolish those properties because they are in direct contravention of the Welsh Office PPG? If so—and I appreciate that Montgomery might not survive—the new clause may not be necessary. If it is the Secretary of State's purpose, after the Bill receives Royal Assent, quickly to move in, enforce his powers and direct those few miscreants in Wales to demolish their properties, new clause 17 may be unnecessary. If, however, the Secretary of State allows his PPGs to be flouted as they occasionally are in different areas, the new clause will be necessary to protect people from renegade local planning committee members who give permission as a result of personal considerations being uppermost in their minds.

I can do no better than to refer again to the clear message given in many of the local government commissioners' reports—that although only a small percentage of Welsh district councils are guilty of that practice, their actions bring the whole planning system into disrepute. The commissioners' 1991–92 report stated: One council granted consent for some 48 per cent. of those applications, which were significant departures from the council's own approved policy. One report on a complaint against the council in question observed: Such a situation can only reflect adversely on the council's credibility as a planning authority. The Minister has kindly addressed that issue, and I am sure that he will do so again. However, it is vital that the Welsh Office takes a far more interactive and active role in ensuring that planning policy guidance is followed consistently across Wales, so that when draft local plans are drawn up they are closely scrutinised and development approval for a local planning authority member's land contrary to the recommendations of the local authority's own officers will not be tolerated.

The balance between local democracy and central Government is critical. I hope that the Government will either use their powers to ensure consistency or put in place a system to replace the county structure plan as a check, if it happens that the local development plan that the Bill proposes is ineffective. If the new clause is accepted, the Welsh Office will be let off the hook and local democracy will be able to remain paramount. But I am sure, as the Minister is aware, that the people of Wales are not happy with the situation whereby certain councils have been able to give planning permissions without close reference to the law, the statutes and policy planning guidelines. It gives me great pleasure to support the new clause.

6.30 pm
Mr. Llwyd

I speak as a member of the Select Committee on Welsh Affairs. It has been a somewhat sobering experience over the past few months to undertake the research and investigation to which the hon. Member for Gower (Mr. Wardell) referred. There were quite shocking instances of breaches of planning regulations, which, apparently, were dealt with in a very unsatisfactory manner, and with no regard whatever for normal planning guidelines.

I moved a not dissimilar amendment in Committee, which was supported by the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales and other Welsh bodies that are actively involved in planning issues in Wales. The core point is that we must have some strategic view of planning in Wales, otherwise we could end up with 21, 22 or 23 different unitary development plans and a very queer patchwork throughout Wales. Another obvious point arising from the new clause is that environmental issues cross development boundaries, and are vitally important; they do not adhere to a particular boundary.

The new clause is highly necessary. Those who are far more proficient than I am in planning matters feel strongly about it. They feel that the current safeguards in the Bill are not appropriate or strong enough and that we might well be left in a very haphazard position were the scenario referred to by the hon. Member for Gower to come about. I sincerely hope that the Government will give further thought to that important issue.

Will the Minister give me an assurance regarding the amendment that I tabled in Committee about the role of community councils? Since tabling that amendment, I have received upwards of 170 responses from community and town councils in Wales, all of them, bar two, supporting it. The Minister may recall that I said that there should be better consultation with community councils and that, if a community or town council wants to meet planning officers, that meeting should take place before any decision is made. I recall the Minister's words. He told me that either a similar amendment would be tabled on Report—which is today—or those words would be incorporated in guidelines issued to the new unitary authorities in their consultation process with the community councils. I trust that the Minister can give me some assurance on that. I fully support the purport of new clause 17.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Gwilym Jones)

I thank the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) for his concise and thoughtful speech. I well recall the much longer debates that we had on the subject in Committee, and his speeches then. I want to give him the assurance that he seeks about the relationship between the new local planning authorities and community councils. I am confident that the arrangements that we have in mind, particularly the guidelines that we intend to issue, will produce exactly the right form of consultations, and that we will see a better arrangement to ensure that the important views of community councils can be heard by the local planning authorities.

I welcome the interest of the hon. Member for Gower (Mr. Wardell), who is Chairman of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee. His Committee's inquiries into planning have resulted in a useful working together for the Welsh Office, drawing on the work of the Select Committee. We are taking forward a process of monitoring departure applications, and I am sure that that is exactly the additional monitoring that the Committee wanted us to do. I am grateful for its assistance in that matter.

I am confident that the concept of unitary development plans will be a much better arrangement. It draws together the differences between what is now being done by the county councils and the district councils under one arrangement. I would say to the hon. Gentleman that I am confident that there will be timely progress in taking forward the unitary development plans, building on the work that has already been done by the existing councils.

Each local planning authority will be required to address strategic issues during the preparation and adoption of its unitary development plan. Policies related to the urban and rural economy, transport, planning, environment and conservation are among the topics that will be included in part 1 of the plan. Land use proposals will figure in part 2.

Under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, authorities will be required to consult adjoining authorities on strategic and other cross-boundary issues. Two or more neighbouring authorities may wish to prepare jointly their unitary development plans. That will be a matter for them. The quality of planning, however, will not be improved by mandatory groupings of authorities. Nor do I feel that they will be helped by having to issue guidance to themselves, because the new clause is very narrow, and the only object that would be achieved by that would be the preparation of joint guidance. Accordingly, I urge the House not to accept the new clause.

Mr. Morgan

That was a disappointing reply, but given the firmness with which it was delivered, it would be pointless to press the matter to a Division. Therefore, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.

Forward to