Red tape or sense?

Those at the Game Fair who were baying for the removal of government-imposed red tape may just pause for thought now that Eric Pickles’s Department aims to remove much of the red tape that protects the beauty of the countryside to allow development to proceed more easily and to put economic growth ahead of protecting natural beauty.  One man’s red tape is another man’s sensible protection.

I enjoyed Fiona Reynolds‘s appearance on yesterday’s BBC Radio 4 Today programmee – it’s good to find the National Trust stirring itself on an environmental issue.  Fiona was once the boss of the CPRE and it’s no surprise to find that they too, and many other environmental NGOs, criticise the government position.

The government position from CLG is that the new simpler system will encourage sustainable growth.  And CLG is very proud to have reduced over 1000 pages of planning policy to a mere 52 now.  Within those 52 pages, on page 4 in fact, is the phrase ‘Local planning authorities should plan positively for new development, and approve all individual proposals wherever possible‘.  The 52 pages are fairly intelligible and are well worth a read.  The section on the natural environment starts on page 46 of 52.  It comes after the sections telling local authorities that they have to plan for minerals extraction, new transport infrastructure, renewable energy projects and more housing.

This is not my subject, I’ve always found the planning system difficult to get to grips with.  It may well be that the 52 reasonably well-written pages (there are quite a few split infinitives and missing hyphens though) are just what I need to understand things better. But in these clear few pages what leaps out at me is the very clear intention to sweep away restrictions on concrete-pouring, although concrete-pouring is always described as economic development.  The right words are there to give succour to those who value the beauty of the English countryside but one has to look deep into Eric Pickles eyes and try to find evidence for him sharing that love and having the wit to protect it.

A few Pickles quotations:

‘When abolishing regional planning, I was asked – what central guidance is being put in its place? We’re aren’t. It’s called localism.’

‘We are taking power away from Whitehall and putting it back in the hands of councillors and councils. This first year is only a start. There is much more to do and much more to bed in.  Many of the reforms will be delivered upon the Localism Bill receiving Royal Assent, which should receive Royal Assent at the end of this year.’

‘The Government’s top priority in reforming the planning system is to promote sustainable economic growth and jobs.’

‘What makes an area prosper is business and commerce.’

‘And as the Budget made clear, housing has a vital role in driving up economic growth. So let me be entirely explicit. Britain needs more homes.’

None of these statements is, in itself, awful, but if you check out the pronouncements of Mr Pickles (who is rumoured to be a birdwatcher) you will find that he practically never even nods in the direction of sustainability.  In Mr Pickles’s simple world more economic growth is what is needed, it has to be delivered by government getting out of the way and so the protections must be swept away.

This is in contrast to what people apparently think.  Let’s see what the Daily Mail says about quality of life.  The UK has fallen to only the 25th best place in the world to live (Jan 2010), France is a better place to live than the UK (Sept 2010), Greece is a better place to live than the UK (Nov 2010).  We don’t seem to be very happy – but what will make us happy?

Do you remember that the government actually asked us what makes us happy a while ago?  It was another of David Cameron’s big ideas at the time. And now the Office of National Statistics has announced that there are lots of things that are important to us other than economic wealth including the state of the environment – please note Mr Pickles!

The report from the ONS on measuring national well-being is absolutely worth a read, based as it is on 34,000 responses, and I commend it to Mr Pickles, Mr Osborne and Mr Cameron himself.

Here are some of the things that people, real people, said:

‘It’s long overdue that we start to understand quality of life that may not, for
some people, be based on material wealth or possessions’

‘Creating a society that we are proud to hand on to our children and
grandchildren’

‘Happiness has to be about more than finance, it has to look at wider social
issues and what enriches life’

‘It should not be used by Government as a justification of its policies, but
as a genuine learning experience’

‘Nature and the environment has to be at the top of the list. Without it none
of us live. And for me personally it helps make my life worth while. Nature is
healing inspiring and a good balance for what is important in life’

‘We need to get away from regarding economic indicators as the be all
and end all’

 

Aren’t people sensible?

And the National Trust is right to contrast the urban sprawl of Los Angeles, which I have now seen, with the protection given to our own environment by the planning system.  The USA is large and has many open spaces compared with our own crowded isle.  When you have Yellowstone to retreat to maybe you can stomach the ghastly urban sprawl around many US towns (perhaps?) but in crowded England beauty needs strong protection, as once lost it is so difficult to regain.

This issue may be one where the Government finds that its policies of ‘localism’ and removing ‘red tape’ chime with people at a headline level but jar when it comes down to that very local level about which they talk.  Red tape is the friend of the NIMBY, and a planning system ensures that what you don’t want in your back yard doesn’t just get dumped in someone else’s back yard.

[registration_form]