Will The Planning White Paper Put Us Back 60 Years?

4 July 2007

Will The Planning White Paper Put Us Back 60 Years?

As the 60th anniversary of the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act [1] approaches, the Government’s recent Planning White Paper [2] threatens to undermine much of what the old system was trying to secure.

The original Town and Country Planning Act was formed out of concern for the health of the population of Britain, particularly those in the city, as well as fears that unrestricted development would blight the countryside.

Marina Pacheco, Head of Planning at CPRE [3] said,

‘If it hadn’t been for our planning system, towns and cities would have sprawled across the countryside in the same way they do in the United States. While Los Angeles is 100 miles at its widest, London is a mere 25 miles – thanks largely to Green Belt planning controls [4].’

Yet, the recent Planning White Paper appears to be focused on securing economic growth at any cost. This raises the prospect of a future of unconstrained development. The White Paper fails fully to recognise the multitude of economic, social and environmental benefits the planning system provides, or the growing threat of climate change.

Marina Pacheco continues:

‘If London had continued to sprawl without the benefit of strong planning controls it would have swallowed up Reading, Brighton and Oxford by now. We would also have back-to-back suburbia from Birmingham to Stoke-on-Trent, and sprawling urban conurbations in every region of England. This wasn’t an acceptable vision for the nation in 1947 and it should be even less acceptable today.’

CPRE is a member of a coalition of leading environmental and civic organisations which have come together to persuade the Government to rethink the proposals in the Planning White Paper. [5]

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1. The Town and Country Planning Act 1947 was passed by the post-war Labour Government and was the foundation of modern town and country planning in the United Kingdom. It received Royal Assent in August that year. The fundamental change brought in by the Act was the nationalisation of development rights; ownership alone no longer conferred the right to develop the land.

2. Planning for a Sustainable Future White Paper, was published on the 21 May 2007 and produced jointly by Communities and Local Government, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Department for Trade and Industry and the Department for Transport. The White Paper sets out a wide package of reforms and is divided into two sections. The first half contains controversial proposals for reforming planning for Major Infrastructure Projects. The second half of the White Paper deals with streamlining other aspects of the planning system.

3. CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Sir Max Hastings. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen.

4. A graphic image of the sprawl of Los Angeles compared to London is shown in the summer issue of Countryside Voice (pp 42 – 45). A copy of this article, Why it didn’t happen here, is available at: www.cpre.org.uk/news/media-centre (login - all lower case: user name: media, password: journalist). Aerial images of Los Angeles and Europe as used in this article can be obtained from: Almay ((0)1235 844600 / sales@alamy.com) or of England from Skyscan (01242 621357 / info@skyscan.co.uk).

5. The other groups involved are the Council for National Parks, Friends of the Earth, the Civic Trust, the Ramblers’ Association, RSPB, the New Economics Foundation, AirportWatch, enoughsenough.org, Transport 2000, The Grasslands Trust, The Wildlife Trusts and the Woodland Trust.

---

Press releases, papers and documents published on this page are the intellectual property of an organisation unrelated to Central Lobby. We promote their parliamentary and political campaigning activities as they are subscribers to the Central Lobby service.

As such, Central Lobby does not edit, endorse, or attempt to balance the opinions expressed on this page. The content of press releases and other such types of content are the responsibility of the originating organisation.