🏗️ Delegated Legislation Committee
General Committees
New planning regulations were introduced to streamline the process for Crown development in England, allowing direct applications to the Planning Inspectorate for nationally important projects, bypassing local planning authorities. The Minister assured that community engagement would remain a key part of the process, with mandatory consultation periods and potential public hearings. Concerns were raised about the potential overuse of these new routes and the vagueness of criteria for national importance and urgency. Additionally, amendments to the Community Infrastructure Levy aim to ensure that developments approved under these new routes contribute fairly to local infrastructure.
Summary
-
The session discussed two sets of regulations: the Draft Town and Country Planning (Fees and Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2025 and the Draft Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment etc.) (England) Regulations 2025.
- The Town and Country Planning Regulations aim to introduce two new routes for planning permissions for Crown development in England:
- Crown Development Route: This route is for nationally important projects and involves submitting applications directly to the Planning Inspectorate. It includes a mandatory consultation period of at least 21 days, extended to 30 days for projects requiring an environmental impact assessment. The process ensures community engagement and transparency, with notifications to relevant MPs and public hearings.
- Urgent Crown Development Route: This is for projects of national importance that require urgent decisions. The local planning authority is consulted, but public consultation might be limited due to urgency.
-
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations amendments ensure that developments granted planning permission through the Crown development route are subject to CIL if applicable in the local area. This maintains fairness and consistency in charging for local infrastructure improvements.
-
Concerns were raised about the involvement of local communities in the decision-making process for Crown development projects. The Minister assured that community engagement would be prioritized, including public consultations and notifications to MPs.
-
Environmental protections were emphasized, with both routes requiring environmental impact assessments and adherence to biodiversity net gain requirements.
-
The criteria for determining national importance and urgency for using the new routes were clarified. These will be assessed on a case-by-case basis by the Secretary of State, based on principles outlined in a ministerial statement.
- The session concluded with the Committee agreeing to both sets of regulations, recognizing them as necessary steps to improve planning processes for Crown development and to ensure fair application of the CIL.
Divisiveness
The session displays a moderate level of disagreement, primarily centered around concerns over community involvement, the vagueness of criteria for using new planning routes, and environmental considerations. However, these disagreements are articulated in a manner that suggests a desire for clarification rather than outright opposition to the proposed regulations. The overall tone of the session remains cooperative and focused on refining the legislation rather than rejecting it outright.
Examples of disagreement include:
-
Community Involvement: Lewis Cocking expressed concern about how local residents can make representations under the new planning routes, suggesting a worry that local voices might be diminished. Matthew Pennycook responded by detailing the planned community engagement processes, indicating a proactive approach to addressing these concerns.
-
Criteria for New Routes: Olly Glover raised the issue of the vagueness and broadness of the criteria for deploying the new powers. This indicates a disagreement on the clarity and potential overreach of the proposed regulations. The Minister responded by outlining the principles that would guide the decision-making process, attempting to alleviate these concerns.
-
Environmental Protections: Paul Holmes questioned the balance between development and environmental protection on Crown land. The Minister explained the environmental safeguards and biodiversity net gain requirements, showing a consideration of these concerns in the framework.
Despite these points of contention, the session concluded without a formal division, indicating that the concerns raised were not substantial enough to halt the passage of the regulations. The participants expressed intentions to continue scrutinizing and refining the proposals in future discussions, demonstrating a commitment to constructive dialogue rather than entrenched opposition.