§ 12. Mr. Bill Michie (Sheffield, Heeley)If he will make a statement on the proposed changes to planning appeal procedures in Yorkshire and Humberside. [82791]
§ 15. Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton)What is the current position regarding proposed changes to planning appeal procedures in London. [82795]
§ The Minister for the Regions, Regeneration and Planning (Mr. Richard Caborn)I announced the Government's conclusions on improvements to planning appeal procedures on 31 March. The improved procedures will apply throughout England and are not confined to any specific region.
§ Mr. MichieWill my right hon. Friend further consider appeal procedures that cause problems in local authorities? As a classic example, a local authority Sheffield—refuses a development; the decision is overturned by the Tory Secretary of State; the developer continues; the banking falls down; half a road is demolished; those in housing at the top, which has nothing to do with the development, have to live with an eyesore for three years; local government has no power to deal with the problem; insurance companies play hide and seek; and the developer may go bankrupt. If the Secretary of State overrides a local authority, surely the responsibility resides with the Secretary of State, and not the local authority.
§ Mr. CabornMy hon. Friend knows that the Secretary of State's reserve powers are used extremely sparingly: of about half a million planning applications that go through every year, about 120 to 150 are called in. The general principle that successive Administrations have followed is that planning decisions are better taken locally, within a strategic framework, which we are trying to develop at regional and local level.
When my hon. Friend was chief whip on Sheffield city council and involved with the planning committee, he would have been the first to argue for local authorities to have the power to take planning decisions, and I hope that he will be consistent in that approach.
§ Mr. LoveUnlike my hon. Friend, I welcome the new appeal procedures, which are part of an overall modernisation of the planning system. Given that a new Greater London Authority is to be created, and the complexity of some of the issues in the capital, what does the Department intend to do to modernise the planning system in Greater London?
§ Mr. CabornThe exercise in which we have been engaged since we came to office, which was illustrated to the House in our first report on modernising planning, shows that we have taken a systematic approach to the whole question of land use planning. More importantly, we must start linking that with transport and economic planning, to give us a comprehensive planning system that will be applied not only in the regions but in London. The decisions for London will be the responsibility of the mayor and the new authority, but they must be taken in concert with our modernisation of the overall planning programme.
§ Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet)What is the point of giving the Greater London Authority the power to direct a local planning authority in London to refuse a significant planning application, when the applicant will have the right to appeal to the Secretary of State? Would it not be far better to be more radical and give the mayor the power of the Secretary of State to decide planning appeals, except in those significant planning applications that would affect areas outside Greater London?
§ Mr. CabornThe new mayor will have to consider the wider concerns of London, not only factoring in the land 113 use planning but taking an overview. As the legislation clearly states, the final decision lies with the Secretary of State. We are trying to bring a more holistic approach to the whole question of planning, of which land use planning is but one aspect. The London development agency will discuss transport and economic planning with the mayor. We hope that more informed decisions will be reached, to address the overall needs of London and, indeed, of the English regions.
§ Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield)Many people throughout the regions warmly welcome my right hon. 114 Friend's changes to planning procedures, but does he accept that much of what he has said about the role of the Greater London Authority applies equally to the regions, which want a strategic role in planning and much else, through the regional development agencies in the interim, but eventually through regional assemblies?
§ Mr. CabornMy hon. Friend knows that, through the regional planning guidance, we have instituted an examination in public so that all those issues can be addressed, including the economic impact that the RDAs have at regional level. That agenda will make progress, slowly but surely.