Councillors are being asked for their views on the Government’s proposals for a central Infrastructure Planning Committee (IPC), that would take away current local planning powers to decide on large infrastructure projects in their area such as new runways, railways, roads or power stations.
Surrey County Council Cabinet Member for the Environment Dr Lynne Hack has called for planning decisions to remain at a local level rather than being made by “unelected and distant” national bodies.
Dr Hack said local authorities are in the best position to make decisions affecting their communities rather than quangos. She made the call as she commented on draft government plans for big energy and infrastructure projects to be taken forward by the Infrastructure Planning Committee (IPC).
The IPC came under fire last month because it was costing taxpayers £1 million a month, despite not being able to do the job for which it was created because the government had not defined its legal guidelines.
Dr Hack said: “It is right that there is a need for thinking on a national scale when it comes to big projects affecting the country but local councils must have the lead role for sustainable economic growth.
“Distant and unelected organisations that are not answerable to residents should not be making decisions about planning issues that have such an impact on people’s lives. They place an unnecessary, time consuming and bureaucratic burden on the taxpayer.
“We are best placed to develop local initiatives tailored to the needs of our residents and businesses. This is only logical given we are responsible for local strategy on issues as diverse as education, transport and community safety. Local councillors live and work alongside residents and are best placed to know how any development will impact people’s lives.”
The IPC was set up to deal with planning applications for major national infrastructure and energy projects such as nuclear power stations, high power transmission lines and renewable energy projects.
Twitter
Facebook
This government initiative must be resisted. The urge to control and manipulate all things is endemic in the current administration and this is simply a means to allow big players to steam-roller major projects through by use of the parliamentary lobbies, thus avoiding inconvenient local concerns. What makes this country such a great place to live – and a tourist desination – is that we protect and look after our “back yards”. Back yards are actually very important. We need to start asking serious questions about priorities nand our ability to be efficient with what we already have. For instance, Are not 5 London airports enough?
Local planning autonomy may be popular but hardly makes sense for projects of national significance in a country as small as ours. If the country needs nuclear power stations, airports, high-speed rail links and the like, nobody is likely to welcome the intrusion in their back yard, making a central decision inevitable and essential. What is needed is a mature relationship and open process between local councils and the centre so that final decisions take into account local factors, and are truly optimal for the country and the majority of its citizens.
This is yet another example of “big brother”. It is essential that planning matters in a local area, however global the project, are kept local. Local people and local elected Councillors and County Councillors know their area better than anyone from outside, however well meaning, and must be part of the planning process. If the developers do not like the local decision they can go to appeal where we all have to opportunity to have our say. I reasise the criticism is that this causes delay. But better a delay and a project that suits the area than a disaster that we spend decades trying to put right.