Ministers move to axe early public consultation phase for infrastructure schemes
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner insisted 'high standards' would not be compromised by the changes and said plans would still be 'informed by community engagement'.
Currently, the Planning Act 2008 includes a statutory requirement to consult on the likely impact of a proposed nationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP) during the pre-application stage.
The process includes engagement with communities affected, statutory consultees and local authorities aimed at refining an application before it is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate.
In a written statement on Wednesday, housing minister Matthew Pennycook said: 'The Government has concluded that these statutory requirements, absent from other planning regimes, including those used to determine applications for new housing, now serve to slow down projects and deter improvements to them – wholly contrary to their nominal purpose of producing better outcomes.'
Mr Pennycook added that 'clear' evidence shows the current system's performance has deteriorated sharply in recent years.
He cited figures showing consent for projects took on average 4.2 years to be secured in 2021, compared with 2.6 years in 2012.
The current pre-application requirements will be replaced by new statutory guidance under amendments to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, with developers still expected to consult with the community to ensure projects 'better reflect communities' views'.
As well as the consultation process being brought in line with planning applications for major housing schemes, new statutory guidance would 'allow changes to be made dynamically based on community feedback' to reduce delays.
As part of this new approach, developers would be able to adapt proposed schemes without restarting the process.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayne said Britain cannot afford to have projects 'held up by tiresome requirements and uncertainty' (Andy Buchanan/PA)
This could potentially save more than £1 billion for 'industry and taxpayers' in this Parliament, Mr Pennycook said.
He added: 'The Government is clear that removing these statutory requirements does not signify that pre-submission consultation and high-quality engagement is no longer important – such engagement and consultation will remain vital to delivering successful major infrastructure projects.
'However, the current system is not working for communities or developers.'
The Government said the reforms are also expected to bring in new private investment and boost efforts to build 1.5 million homes.
Ms Rayner said: 'Critical national infrastructure is key to Britain's future and security – so we can't afford to have projects held up by tiresome requirements and uncertainty, caused by a system that is not working for communities or developers and holding back our true potential.
'We are strengthening the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to make sure we can lead the world again with new roads, railways and energy infrastructure as part of the Plan for Change, whilst ensuring local people still have a say in our journey to get Britain building.'
Under the proposed changes, local authorities would be made aware of proposed applications so they can inform and advise on developments.
Wider reforms in the Bill aim to speed up planning decisions, remove 'blockers' to major infrastructure and housing delivery, and support environmental goals.
A recent forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility found the Government's proposals for an updated national planning policy framework would drive housebuilding in the UK to its highest level in more than 40 years and boost the economy by £6.8 billion by 2029/30.
Responding to the announcement, Carl Trowell, president of strategic infrastructure at the National Grid, said: 'We welcome the Government's proposal today which will ensure that consultation and engagement can be more effective and targeted.
'This will accelerate the path to delivering critical infrastructure while continuing to ensure the views of local communities are heard.'
Sam Richards, chief executive of pro-growth campaign group Britain Remade, said: 'Too often consultation is a long and expensive box-ticking exercise.
'By slashing delays and encouraging real community engagement, the Government is backing growth, investment and the kind of national renewal we all want to see.'
However, the National Trust said it was 'deeply concerned' about the proposals, warning that the removal of early consultation could cause environmental and economic harm.
Ingrid Samuel, director of historic environment at the trust, said: 'Pre-application consultation is a critical foundation of the consents process for major infrastructure, allowing experts and local communities to spot problems and opportunities at an early stage and help shape and influence these complex, nationally important proposals.
'We are deeply concerned that its removal could lead to badly planned, costly projects that deliver poorly designed infrastructure, harming our economy as well as our landscapes, nature and heritage.
'In addition to this, the proposed changes are likely to mean that key issues are identified too late in the process, driving adversarial examinations and causing significant delays and frustrations. All of this will add up to a public loss of trust in the system and its outcomes.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
30 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' Nadia Whittome (James Manning/PA) The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
'Rachel Reeves hopes public gives her credit for listening to winter fuel anger'
Rachel Reeves today tried to turn the page on Labour's biggest mistake so far. Only weeks after the party's landslide election victory, she stunned the country by announcing plans to strip around 10 million pensioners of their winter fuel payments. A Tory aide who served two Chancellors once told me that the winter fuel allowance was at the top of the Treasury hit list offered to No11's new incumbents. Ms Reeves's predecessors didn't fancy picking a fight with pensioners and baulked at being blamed for leaving OAPs struggling to heat their homes. But in the early days in Government, the Chancellor was focused on proving she had an iron grip on the public finances. It was clear from the start that it was a serious error, puncturing the optimism and goodwill from the public who had handed Labour a massive majority. Even senior Government figures acknowledged it had been a mistake but there were fears that they couldn't afford to U-turn - either politically or economically. However it became a running sore for Labour. MPs complained they were being inundated by complaints from constituents and it came up repeatedly on the doorstep in last month's local elections. Unnerved by the surge in support for Reform UK and growing unrest from Labour MPs, Keir Starmer and his Chancellor blinked. Follow our Mirror Politics account on Bluesky here. And follow our Mirror Politics team here - Lizzy Buchan, Mikey Smith, Kevin Maguire, Sophie Huskisson, Dave Burke and Ashley Cowburn. Be first to get the biggest bombshells and breaking news by joining our Politics WhatsApp group here. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you want to leave our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Or sign up here to the Mirror's Politics newsletter for all the best exclusives and opinions straight to your inbox. And listen to our exciting new political podcast The Division Bell, hosted by the Mirror and the Express every Thursday. Initially Downing Street suggested we would have to wait until the Budget for the full details, leaving pensioners in the dark about whether they would be eligible. But Ms Reeves gave them hope by confirming an almost complete U-turn, with only the richest OAPs missing out. The Chancellor will take some flak in Westminster for this U-turn. There will be questions over how it's funded and whether the Government is vulnerable to pressure on other unpopular policies. But she'll be hoping that the public gives her credit for listening to their concerns, allowing the Government to draw a line under this sorry episode and shift focus to the positive things it's trying to do.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' Nadia Whittome (James Manning/PA) The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
