Planning overhaul 'damage' feared

26 July 2011 Last updated at 12:46 GMT Conservationists say the threat to the countryside will grow as the economy recovers A proposed planning system overhaul in England could lead to "unchecked and damaging development", campaigners say.

The draft National Planning Policy Framework introduces a "presumption in favour of sustainable development".

The Campaign to Protect Rural England said it feared "grave" consequences. The National Trust said the government was "putting short term financial gain ahead of everything else".

Planning minister Greg Clark has said a "simpler, swifter" system is needed.

The framework streamlines more than 1,000 pages of policy into just 52, transforming a system whose "volume and complexity have made planning increasingly inaccessible to all but specialists", according to the Department for Communities and Local Government.

Mr Clark said: "National planning policy and central government guidance has become so bloated that it now contains more words than the complete works of Shakespeare, making it impenetrable to ordinary people."

The department insists that protections for the natural and historic environment underpin its proposals, which also encourage "opportunities for sustainable growth to rebuild the economy".

Business Secretary Vince Cable said: "The new approach to planning will be a significant step forward in creating the right conditions for businesses to start up, invest, grow and create jobs."

'Wrong place' Continue reading the main story

The government needs to listen and make further improvements or the consequences for the countryside, towns and villages will be grave”

End Quote Campaign to Protect Rural England But the National Trust expressed concern over the framework's "core presumption that the default answer to development will be 'yes'".

This could be "a green-light for poor quality or development in the wrong place", the charity warned.

"We know from our own experience that new development can combine economic benefit with great results for people and the environment," the National Trust said.

"By changing their plans to make sure this happens everywhere, the government could lead us towards a green industrial revolution.

"Without these key changes, the country's green spaces and built heritage will come under the kind of threat not seen in decades."

The CPRE said it welcomed "much of the thinking" behind the government's draft framework.

It acknowledged that more people needed to engage with planning, but the system's complexity had become a "barrier".

However, the group added: "With their crude focus on economic growth and default 'yes' to development, ministers are storing up plenty of unintended consequences for the future.

"Over the next few months the government needs to listen and make further improvements or the consequences for the English countryside and the character of our towns and villages will be grave."

Labour's shadow local government minister, Jack Dromey, said: "David Cameron's government has spent months dithering over the National Planning Policy Framework, causing chaos in the planning system. In the meantime, investment by house builders, developers, energy companies, and transport organisations has been put off due to the uncertainty, damaging this country's economic growth.

"Pushing this document out during the recess, when it should have been published to support the scrutiny of the Localism Bill and whilst Parliament was in session, is unacceptable. This is not the way to begin consultation on an issue of such national importance."

A 12-week consultation on the draft framework has been launched.

The government says the proposals maintain a commitment to protecting green belt, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

Other main points include:

A commitment to public transport, as well as encouraging provision of charging points for electric cars and welcoming other low-emission vehiclesEmphasis on tackling noise pollution, as well as light pollution "affecting the beauty of the night sky"Facilitation of a new generation of renewable energy projects, as part of an acknowledgment of the role of planning in tackling climate change

David Frost, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: "Businesses will welcome the concept of shorter, simpler planning rules, but they need to see more than just a new policy document to regain confidence in the planning system.

"A pro-growth approach must fast become reality on the ground, with local councils saying yes to business growth and expansion far more than they do at present."

View the original article here

Cuts 'will damage physics in UK'

13 May 2011 Last updated at 01:55 GMT By Pallab Ghosh Science correspondent, BBC News The UK has withdrawn from ground-based telescopes in the Northern Hemisphere Deep funding cuts could put the UK's prominence in astronomy and particle physics at risk, MPs have said.

The Science and Technology Committee says astronomy funding will fall by 20% over four years - the science budget's average real-terms cut was 14.5%.

The MPs say some of the resulting cuts are likely to deter leading scientists from working in the UK.

The government says it has protected the science budget but cannot make individual funding decisions.

Committee chairman Labour MP Andrew Miller said: "If you don't invest in big science at the level it needs, it's going to have a big impact on our competitiveness and pre-eminence in areas that are important to the country."

Continue reading the main story

It only takes a few million to keep several Northern Hemisphere telescopes operating. It would be no more than a bankers bonus”

End Quote Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell President, Institute of Physics The UK has already had to withdraw from involvement in projects using ground-based telescopes in the Northern Hemisphere.

Professor Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell, who is president of the Institute of Physics, gave evidence to the MPs that these projects could be reinstated for a relatively small amount of money.

"It only takes ?2-3m to keep several Northern Hemisphere telescopes operating," she told BBC News. "The amount seems to me remarkably little and I observed when we met with the select committee that it would be no more than a banker's bonus."

The president of the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS), Professor Roger Davies, fears that this single decision may drive away many of the country's best astronomers.

"The UK recruits in the global marketplace and there's a great deal of competition for the posts we do have available. If people are no longer able to have access to global facilities then they will think twice about moving here."

The body that funds astronomy and particle physics, the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) told the select committee that withdrawal from telescopes in the Northern Hemisphere was necessary to pay to have access to observatories in the Southern Hemisphere.

'Wholesale' cuts

Professor Davies acknowledges that there were plans to reduce the stake in some Northern Hemisphere observatories "but it's not at all true to say that they would amount to the wholesale cuts we are seeing now".

The science budget as a whole received a more generous settlement in last year's spending review than many had expected. There were fears of cutbacks of between 20% and 30%.

Instead it received a freeze in funding and an assurance that it would be ring-fenced for four years, amounting to a real terms cut of 14.5% over that period.

The cut to particle physics and astronomy research is much worse, partly because because STFC inherited debts of ?75m when it was created in 2007. The funding body said in a statement that it shared the committee's belief that physics research should remain world class.

"Particle and nuclear physics and astronomy, with space science and the other disciplines we support, play a crucial role in inspiring younger people to become involved in science, technology, engineering and mathematics," the statement said.

A spokesman for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Bis), which ultimately funds the research, said: "Despite enormous pressure on public spending, the ?4.6bn per annum funding for science and research programmes has been protected in cash terms and ring fenced against future pressures during the spending review period.

"The Haldane principle dictates that the government cannot intervene in individual funding decisions."

View the original article here