Planning framework ‘recipe for confusion for waste

The failure of the proposed National Planning Policy Framework to clearly set out the role waste infrastructure should play in delivering sustainable development, is contributing to a recipe for confusion which could jeopardise investment in new projects.

That was the warning made today (October 17) by the Environmental Services Association (ESA) as a government consultation on the framework, launched in July 2011 (see letsrecycle.com story), came to a close.

The framework is intended to act as a single strategic planning national document, replacing the current range of national planning policy statements, guidance notes and circulars from which planning policy is drawn.

But, in its response to the consultation, the ESA attacked the confused and disjointed approach towards waste that it claimed had been taken in the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) document.

And, it warned that a combination of this and the fact that over half of all councils do not have a waste development framework in place, despite being having been required to do so since 2004, represented a recipe for confusion.

The ESAs director of policy, Matthew Farrow, said: The waste management industry wants to invest the 10 [billion] to 20 billion needed to upgrade Britains waste infrastructure, but to do so needs a coherent planning framework.

The NPPFs focus on growth is welcome, but the document fails to set out the importance of waste management to delivering sustainable development. At a time when 58% of local authorities have still not put in place their waste plans, despite having a legal obligation to do so, this is a recipe for confusion.

According to the ESA, while the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires councils to replace old style waste plans with new waste development frameworks, as it stands only 10% of waste planning authorities have a complete framework in place.

Over 30% have at least completed the first stage in the process and adopted a core strategy but, the ESA said, the remaining 58% do not, meaning planning policy in these authorities is a complicated myriad of old style plans and saved policies.

In light of this, Mr Farrow said the NPPF was a crucial document which needed to give waste management its rightful place.

Planning reform

Alongside its response, the ESA also published a new document, No Time to Waste: Planning Reform for Sustainable Waste Infrastructure, which made a series of recommendations for how the planning system should change to benefit the waste industry.

As well as changes to the NPPF, these also include:

• Planning authorities should form strategic waste planning partnerships;
• The Government should propose statutory time limits for the preparation and adoption of development plans;
• Business rates and a proportion of the community infrastructure levy should be retained for direct community benefit;
• Planning decisions should be excluded from the scope of local referenda proposed in the Localism Bill;
• Local authorities should be required to publicise the costs to the tax payer of unsuccessfully defending a planning appeal;
• On an annual basis, Defra and the department for communities and local government should report jointly on progress in delivering waste infrastructure.