Comments on: The Independent’s planning map

By: Susan

Susan — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:04:10 +0000

Yes, of course it does. But why isn't DC saying this? Mr Redwood, you have never strayed from your convictions and I respect you for that. However, it's getting to the point where I don't know what the Conservatives represent. A pinch of that and a pinch of the other won't convince those of the electorate who think about politics and life and recognise how they impact on each other. More needs to be done by DC and his front bench.

By: William B.

William B. — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:23:09 +0000

Local councils around the country take their responsibilities for planning very seriously. Hearings are in public and often well attended, there is some "ya-boo" intervention from spectators from time-to-time but far less often than one might fear.

When Mr and Mrs Bloggins submit a written objection to their neighbour's application to build an extension which will reduce light to their garden they are not dismissed as NIMBY-ists by the planning officers, their objection is considered and weighed and reasons are always given if it is overruled. Indeed, Mr and Mrs Bloggins are often visited in person by a planning officer so that they can show how their garden will be affected and explain why they are concerned. If their objection is overruled they will often (but by no means always) accept that decision because they have been given a fair hearing.

The planning system is an excellent example of the effectiveness of having decisions taken at a local level following fair and open consideration. Not only is such a system likely to result in decisions which are acceptable to the local people, but it gives reassurance that people can have a say on matters which affect their everyday lives.

The more remote the decision-maker, the greater the chance for discontent. Those of a statist disposition will approach such a prospect with equanimity, those who value personal independence, fairness and accountability will not.

This awful Planning Bill seems to be yet another example of the removal of powers away from local people. Whether it leads to objectively "better" decisions is a moot point, but it will undoubtedly make people feel that they have less and less of a say in decisions that affect them and that is, in my opinion, to be avoided wherever possible.

By: mikestallard

mikestallard — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:55:28 +0000

For those of us who are conspiracy theorists against the EU, the new planning law is quite simple:
The Regional Authorities have their plans which, of course, in true Soviet style, demand housing for the proletariat – sorry eco towns. These ghastly outrages on otherwise beautiful Polish/English countryside have to be rammed through somehow.
Therefore we need a central Commissariat to do that.

The other evening a Conservative Housing Minister came on TV and spoke the most sensible words: let local people decide planning and, where we think fit, we will actually subsidise them. I thought that really made sense.

My next door neighbour but one has just chopped down a large and beautiful silver birch in his garden. I was so outraged that I actually allowed myself a sarcastic remark to the (totally innocent) tree surgeons who did the destruction! Nthing like local planning to get people aereated.

By: paul coombes

paul coombes — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:44:58 +0000

I’m a bit confused mainly, I suspect, due to my own ignorance. You say “so we have a few major national projects decided nationally”. Does that mean that currently there is a system whereby national projects can be decided nationally from which I would infer that this proposed new QuANGO would take its place, or do you mean that you would like to see some other new method of national projects being decided nationally instead this new QuANGO? I hope that makes sense.

Reply: Today some projects are decided nationally by Ministers on an Inspectors Report. Under the new system the government would lay down policies, then national issues would be decided by a new quango. We do not need the quango in my view.

By: Letters From A Tory

Letters From A Tory — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:01:43 +0000

Labour know they are running out of time and bulldozing through planning projects is the only way that they can give the illusion that they are supporting the UK economy and energy industry. They had every chance to solve a lot of our energy and economic problems over the last 11 years, and they've only just realised how screwed we all are. http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com

By: NigelC

NigelC — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:16:19 +0000

Yesterday Herts County Council launched a judicial review of the first regional plan, the East of England Regional Spatial Strategy saying the Government had not complied with its own planning process

By: backofanenvelope

backofanenvelope — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:05:02 +0000

Lots of "why don't theys" in that piece.

Answer – because they are a bunch of prats!