HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report

1. Executive Summary

1.1. The purpose of this paper is to seek the views of Cabinet, prior to consideration by County Council on 16 July 2009, on the best way to proceed with the proposition of the Governance Committee to submit a proposal under the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 (SCA) to seek the return of planning powers.

1.2. This paper

(i) outlines the potential scope of such a proposal;

(ii) sets out the implications of government legislation currently before Parliament which changes strategic planning governance; and

(iii) sets out the consultation requirements, and the need for wide support to be secured for the submission to have a prospect of succeeding

2. Contextual information

2.1. The County Council referred a motion to make a submission under the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 to the Governance Committee to consider potential topics. The Governance Committee decided to recommend to the County Council that the Act be used to seek the return of planning powers and that a submission be made in the first round. The Committee also recommended planning ahead for future rounds, taking proposals from Councillors to the Policy and Resources Select Committee and also preparing for submissions to the County Council. The process for first round submissions is that they are submitted to the Local Government Association (LGA) by 31 July. The LGA will then filter submissions and present those selected to the Communities Secretary for decision.

2.2. A draft proposal has been prepared in response to the Governance Committee's recommendation, prior to County Council considering the matter on 16 July.

2.3. The paper addresses the devolution of the regional planning powers contained in the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, but also anticipates the changes to those powers set out in the Local Development, Economic Development and Construction Bill currently before Parliament. This Bill envisages a single integrated regional strategy covering economic development and planning. The Bill transfers strategic planning responsibilities from regional assemblies (the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) in Hampshire's case) to joint arrangements of regional development agencies (eg the South East England Development Agency - SEEDA) and a `Leaders' Board' comprising a small number of leaders of local authorities in the region. The Bill, as it currently stands, deletes the provision under the 2004 Planning Act which gave principal authorities the duty to provide first sub-regional proposals (S4.4). This duty was a hard won concession by principal authorities in the final run up to the passing of the 2004 Act.

3. Hampshire's Proposal

3.1. The proposal that could be advanced under the SCA would be that responsibility for preparing the first draft of the Regional Strategy (RS) should be transferred to county councils as follows:

(i) each county area would prepare a strategy for its area;

(ii) these would be combined together into a region-wide document and assessed by SEEDA/Leaders' Board which would resolve any inconsistencies with the county areas concerned;

(iii) the Examination in Public Panel could play a role in testing the combined region-wide document, building on its ongoing role in the RS preparation process;

(iv) each county strategy would be prepared by the county council jointly with any unitary council(s) and any national park authority in the county area, in consultation with the non-unitary district councils and other stakeholders;

(v) to ensure consistency, the region would set the timetable for preparation of all the county strategies and their scope in the context of the existing strategy (South East Plan), national policy, etc;

(vi) the region could also prescribe a limited number of parameters for the content of each county strategy, eg housebuilding range, to be tested and broad development principles;

(vii) the timely preparation of the county strategy could be a target in the LAA, which would build in local authority commitment to it at a high level and give reassurance to Government over timely delivery;

(viii) each county strategy should be an holistic, integrated strategy, including identifying major development areas and development principles and the infrastructure required for delivery of development. This would enable infrastructure items to be listed in the Regional Strategy Implementation Plan, which would thus provide a framework for local authorities to implement them through devolved funding arrangements also put forward in the draft paper; and

(ix) the devolved transport funding arrangements could include the integration of existing national and regional funding pots, together with devolution of all funding to principal authorities in a county area not required for schemes of national or genuinely regional importance. In smaller county areas, this could be to a sub-regional grouping of more than one county.

3.2. In the longer term, the proposals are potential building-blocks for new, more devolved arrangements for strategic planning should any proposal to abolish regional planning powers ever be implemented. Should this initiative prove successful, it might be possible to extend it to cover other areas where a funding agency currently operates at regional level. This could include, for example, housing and economic development, currently overseen by the Homes and Communities Agency and the Regional Development Agencies.

3.3. Implementation of the proposal outlined above would require an amendment to the legislation which sets out responsibilities for strategic planning. Currently this is the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act but the relevant clauses are set to be superseded by the provisions set out in the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill. This Bill puts on a statutory basis the proposed duty on regional development agencies and local authority leaders to produce a single regional strategy.

4. Consultation

4.1. The Act specifies a certain level of consultation including a representative body of local citizens. It is a requirement of the Act to `reach agreement' with the consultees, including the citizens' panel. A draft consultation plan consistent with a 31 July submission date is attached as an appendix for consideration. The survey has already commenced, given the short timescale.

4.2. Given the impact of the proposal, the draft paper has been used to consult informally with other county council officers in the region (pending the outcome of elections) and with the LGA. There is likely to be a reluctance amongst other county councils to promote such a proposal at a time when the governance of regional planning is before Parliament and contains a hard won concession that council leaders share responsibility with the Regional Development Agency for the production of a regional strategy. In addition, there has been a significant amount of lobbying to retain the powers for principal authorities to prepare first sub-regional proposals, so far without success.

4.3. LGA informal advice is that, without the support of other councils (both within the region and locally) the proposition is unlikely to succeed through the LGA selection process. Moreover, the LGA has suggested that the appropriate vehicle, while there is a Bill before Parliament, would be lobbying for further amendments to the Bill. This is because submissions under the SCA have to be in conflict with existing legislation. Given the Government's rejection to date of amendments to the Bill to retain the statutory duty of principal authorities to prepare first sub-regional proposals, this approach is unlikely to succeed. For both of the above reasons, it may be beneficial to delay any submission until the legislation is passed. The Bill is at the third reading stage in the House of Commons and can be expected to be completed this parliamentary session.

4.4. More generally, the risks of proceeding with the proposition include:

(i) likely opposition from regional bodies;

(ii) ambivalence among district authorities;

(iii) lack of engagement from Hampshire residents;

(iv) the administrative and financial burden of taking control of strategic planning;

(v) lack of funding transferred to support regional planning powers; and

(vi) failure to receive Secretary of State approval.

5. Recommendations

5.1. That Cabinet considers:

(i) the scope of the outline proposal to recover strategic planning powers and greater devolution of transport funding;

(ii) whether the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 is the best vehicle for promoting such a proposition and the appropriate timing for any submission given draft legislation before Parliament which impacts on the governance of strategic planning; and

(iii) how best to promote the proposition to local authorities in the region and locally.

5.2. That Cabinet invites South East England Councils to consider the planning framework embodied in the potential submission.

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:

Links to the Corporate Strategy

Other Significant Links

IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:

1. Equalities Impact Assessment:

1.1. No impact.

2. Impact on Crime and Disorder:

2.1. No impact.

3. Climate Change:

a) How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint / energy consumption?

No impact.

b) How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?

No impact.

APPENDIX

Draft Consultation Programme for a Proposal Under the Sustainable Communities Act 2007