Paul Foyster’s broadside at the Planning Inspectorate (PINs), demanding their reform, is off target. Given the remaining content of his letter, he clearly knows this, but may well have confused many other readers.
PINs is an impartial ‘court of appeal’ for anybody who believes that their application has not been properly considered, based on the prevailing planning policy.
This policy will be the local planning authority’s interpretation of national guidance, along with that dictated directly by government.
The National Planning Policy Framework was produced by the current government, as its way of supposedly simplify and streamlining the planning process.
A key ambition has also been to increase our housing numbers.
A key part to ensuring that the planning process works effectively locally is the existence of an adopted Local Plan.
This is produced using in-depth evidence and extensive community consultation.
An examination in public is the part of the process where the Planning Inspectorate becomes involved.
An inspector, appointed by PINs, acts as independent and impartial examiner of the draft Local Plan, hearing arguments for and against any part of the Plan that has been challenged.
Once all arguments have been heard and the issues resolved, the Inspector will write a report and the plan will be adopted.
When it comes to individual planning applications, PINs appoints inspectors to consider appeals made by applicants who have had their applications refused by the local planning authority.
The planning inspector uses the current planning policy for their deliberations, with local objections, based on planning related issues, taken into consideration.
If the inspector considers the council didn’t apply planning policy correctly, they will uphold the appeal. Conversely, if they consider policy was correctly applied, the appeal will be dismissed.
The longwinded point I’m making, is that with his demand, Paul Foyster has chosen to shoot the messenger.
For all their shortcomings and occasional aberrant decision locally, the Planning Inspectorate acts only on policy dictated by central government and policies contained in the adopted Local Plan.
I therefore suggest he sends his next letter to the alleged ‘culprit’ he later identifies, the government. More specifically, the recently renamed, Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. Dominic Rabb is Minister for Housing and Planning.
This is the source of the planning policy both LPAs and PINs abide by and therefore the actual root of his dissatisfaction.
Coun Roger Gambba-Jones
Chairman, SHDC Planning Committee
