§ The Minister for Housing and Planning (Keith Hill)The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's public service agreement 6 (PSA6) requires all local planning authorities to complete local development frameworks by 2006 and to perform at or above best value targets for development control by 2006 with interim milestones to be agreed in the service delivery agreement. Our approach to achieving this target is based on putting in place a programme of planning reforms which will deliver a step change in the way planning is carried out, and in the performance of the planning system to deliver sustainable development in the right place at the right time. This will be delivered through primary and secondary legislation, through progress in pursuing best value in local authority services, and through a culture change for all stakeholders in planning. The importance58WS of delivering against PSA6 is recognised by both local and central Government. This statement sets out the approach we intend to take and the measures we have put in place to ensure that we can work together with local Government to deliver this.
At the individual local authority level, we are supporting those who are seeking to improve planning performance by giving additional resources through the planning delivery grant and by providing advice, guidance and help, including through a proposed new planning advisory service. The planning delivery grant is providing £350 million to authorities and regional planning bodies over three years between 2003–04 and 2005–06 and is being distributed to those that demonstrate improvement in their planning services. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, together with other stakeholders including the Planning Officers Society, the Local Government Association and the Improvement and Development Agency, already offer a range of good practice guidance and advice. We shall be reviewing and, where necessary, updating that guidance and advice. The planning advisory service is to be piloted later in 2003.
Our engagement with councils will be in accordance with the protocol agreed with local government and will be responsive to the outcome of comprehensive performance assessment (CPA) and performance against our best value targets for planning. In particular we will seek to work with councils in the context of their improvement planning to raise the quality of planning services. In line with the expectation that all authorities will meet PSA6, our work will be with any authority.
For each financial year, we will identify, in consultation with the Government offices for the regions, poorly performing development control authorities. Such judgments will be based on the level of performance the authority has achieved in relation to meeting the PSA6 targets, and the rate or direction of change in the authority's performance. Where necessary, we will set authorities best value performance standards for a financial year. We are already engaged with a number of authorities that have been or are now failing to make adequate progress towards the PSA6 targets and will continue such action with any further authorities in 2003–04 and 2004–05. In relation to the preparation of local development frameworks, subject to the enactment of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill, we will have regard to the progress against the local development scheme as set out in the annual monitoring report.
By 2005–06, any authority that is not close to achieving the development control targets or is not making timely progress against its local development scheme or both will be regarded as poorly performing in planning services. The objective is to work with authorities to drive their performance up to meet the PSA6 targets. During the year in which they are subject to standards or when an annual monitoring report shows failure of an authority to adhere to its local development scheme, we will investigate the action authorities are taking to improve their performance and assess the likelihood that they will meet the PSA6 targets.
59WSWhere we judge that any authority lacks the commitment or capacity to improve its planning performance, we will consider whether and how to support performance improvement. In arriving at such judgments we will be looking, in the light of the results the authority is achieving, at the adequacy of the processes and managerial systems; the level of professional competence; the level of resource and other inputs to the planning service; and at the political and managerial leadership.
We will identify mechanisms that will enable us, as far as possible, to work with councils to focus action and support within the authority's regular cycle of improvement planning. Each year, every authority must publish its priorities in its best value performance plan. Those authorities that have been through CPA will also be required to undertake recovery or improvement planning. Where we engage directly with authorities, we will discuss with them what specific areas we will expect them to address in such plans. Among the issues that we will want to explore with authorities in following up improvement planning will be close monitoring of performance and change management; the recruitment and retention of staff and development of skills for members and officers; the adequacy of resourcing and the systems and processes in place; and outsourced delivery. We will work with councils through the Audit Commission relationship manager, where relevant, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister appointed Lead Official, and the Government offices in the Regions,
Where, in our view, the actions that an authority is taking to improve performance are not adequate to put them on a course to meet the PSA6 targets by 2006–07, we will consider intervention under the powers available to us. We will not seek to intervene until an authority has had an adequate opportunity to put right its own failings and any intervention would be proportionate to the failure. However, where intervention is necessary, we will carry it through with determination and vigour. Powers under the Local Government Act 1999 include the power to direct, which might include directing inspection of or inquiries into planning services, and the tendering or outsourcing of services. Those under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill enable the Secretary of State to direct on aspects of the plan making process, including the local development scheme.
The use of intervention powers in respect of development control performance would be a last resort, and decisions taken on them would be made in the context of CPA and the protocol. Its objective and content would reflect the need to achieve the PSA6 targets and therefore any authority at risk of not meeting the targets would be liable to intervention. Having regard to the wider context of CPA, the Government will take a different approach in relation to high performing authorities than to poorer performing ones. We will expect excellent authorities to improve their planning performance without support from Government. In weaker authorities we will offer a more intensive model of support and intervention.
Through our planning reform programme and, where necessary, engagement and intervention, our objective is to work with authorities to develop a culture of 60WS continuous improvement in the delivery of an excellent planning service which produces timely, high quality and sustainable outcomes.