At present, ‘nationally significant' developments, such as those set to generate over 50MW of energy, are referred to the IPC. This includes two proposals for energy-from-waste facilities forwarded by incineration specialists Covanta Energy but has meant that many smaller facilities were discounted.
As a result, the ESA, which is the trade body for the waste management sector, today (May 21) called for the IPC's replacement to make it easier for the sector to build facilities.
A spokesman for the ESA said: “Proposals by the new Government to abolish the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) are unlikely to significantly impact upon delivery of new waste management infrastructure. With the exception of hazardous waste infrastructure (which would militate against SMEs and small scale infrastructure) the Planning Act has been of little relevance to our sector as the thresholds of national development are set too high to offer positive benefits for most applications submitted by ESA's Members.
“An effective and efficient planning process is required to achieve greater economic and environmental sustainability and to enable the UK to meet its legal duties resulting from EU waste law, which in practice require more recycling of materials and recovery of energy from waste.
Proposals for a fast track process to replace the IPC must therefore be supported by an Amending Order to clarify the thresholds of the Planning Act for qualifying waste management infrastructure. Otherwise, developers will continue to face uncertainty and delay by the protracted local planning route.”
Planning
The comments echo sentiments laid out by the ESA last week in the wake of the election, when it called on the government to remove current “blockages in the planning system” (see letsrecycle.com story).
Covanta Energy had two proposals which were set to be deliberated on by the IPC, a 400,000 tonnes-a-year capacity facility in Merthyr Tydfil and a 390,000 tonnes-a-year capacity plant set for Bedfordshire. The firm had hoped to receive a planning determination nine months after submitting plans in March 2009.
Today, Covanta declined to comment on what impact the proposed abolition of the IPC would have on these proposals.
Delivery
Reacting to the decision, representatives of waste and planning authorities differed over what impact this would have for the delivery of new infrastructure.
Julia Barrett, chairman of the waste panel at the Association of Directors Environment, Economy, Planning & Transport (ADEPT), said: “The risk of returning the planning powers of the IPC back to local authorities is that such facilities are unlikely to be developed.
“Indeed our fear is that the upshot of many of the government's proposals on planning is that the UK will lose the opportunity to develop strategically significant waste infrastructure in partnership across the private and public sectors.”
Tom Foulkes, director general at the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), said: “The abolition of the IPC is not unexpected and we are hopeful that if it is replaced swiftly – with an “efficient and democratically accountable” system as promised – it won't derail the delivery of vital infrastructure.”
Mr Foulkes said it was “imperative” that the coalition government continued to fast-track national significant projects such as power plants, Cross Rail and offshore windfarms.
He added: “Long and expensive planning inquiries have been a major disincentive to private investment in the past and at a time where we need more infrastructure investment than ever before this could have an adverse impact on our economic performance and global competitiveness.”
Subscribe for free