Rushden Lakes and Skew Bridge (Planning)

Nick Boles Excerpts

Wednesday 18th June 2014 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Nick Boles)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) not only on securing a debate on this issue, which I know is of overwhelming importance to him, his constituents and residents in the broader region, but on his unrelenting campaign, as a Member of Parliament quite properly representing his constituents, in favour of a development that he felt would benefit them dramatically. I congratulate him, along with the many other campaigners who worked so tirelessly, on securing the result he sought. The Secretary of State and I certainly received a great many letters and other representations from people who were in favour of the scheme.

My hon. Friend will understand why I cannot comment on the particular decision. Although the decision has been issued, it is open to legal challenge for a period, and I do not want to prejudice it in any way. However, I will make some broader comments about similar applications, and respond to the ideas that he raised at the end of his speech.

[Andy Sawford]

It is good of the Minister to give way, and he knows that this scheme is very important for my constituency. Will he confirm that he has received letters of support from me and, indeed, joint letters signed by me and the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone)? Will he confirm that, on page 150 of the report, the hon. Gentleman is quoted as praising my strong support and as saying that

“members of the Conservative and Labour party are united in support of this proposal”?

All of us with an interest in east Northamptonshire back this application locally, and I hope that we can get it going as soon as possible. I of course welcome the decision.

[Nick Boles]

I am happy to acknowledge that I have received a letter from the hon. Gentleman supporting the scheme. Obviously, the scheme was not universally supported, otherwise it would not have been called in, but I am certainly happy to make that acknowledgment.

I will move on to the broader issues. It is a very happy debate for me when, on behalf of the Secretary of State, I am congratulated on the granting of a major application. It is a welcome but unfamiliar position to be in.

The application was given so much support partly because it is on a brownfield site, as my hon. Friend said. It is very important for everybody in this country to make absolutely the maximum use of our already developed land, so that we can minimise the amount of undeveloped land that needs to be developed. As with brownfield sites across the country—unless they are of very high quality environmentally—putting such a site to new use is an absolutely key priority for this Government.

I have another general point on my hon. Friend’s suggestions on how such decisions could be made more quickly. I hope that he welcomes this Government’s introduction of neighbourhood planning, which for the first time gives people who are not professional planners or elected local councillors the ability to draw up a plan for their neighbourhood. The key point about a neighbourhood plan is that it becomes an adopted plan with statutory force after it has won approval in a referendum.

We have introduced the concept of referendums into the planning process, but it might prove to be a little too radical even for me to use a referendum as the way to decide a particular planning application. The simple reason is that planning decisions are quasi-judicial, as my hon. Friend will know very well. It is very important that quasi-judicial decisions are determined not just by the balance of popular opinion, although that is very important, but by the need to comply with all laws, regulations and policies and to take into account all material considerations. It might be difficult to show that a decision arrived at in a popular vote had taken into account all material considerations, and I am worried that it might make legal challenges more likely.

I am very keen to see a greater use of neighbourhood planning. I hope that the areas that my hon. Friend talked about, which I understand have held back from planning partly because of this application, will look at the possibility of neighbourhood planning to supplement the work being undertaken on the local plan.

Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to remind the House of the announcements that were made by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Mansion House speech about our determination to make it easier and quicker for more brownfield sites to be brought forward for development. The Government’s proposal is to encourage, incentivise and help local authorities to introduce local development orders on as many brownfield sites as they possibly can, so that an applicant or developer who is willing to build housing on a brownfield site, according to the terms of the local development order, can simply get on and do so, without going through a complex new planning process. That is a big departure and I believe that it will have the support of the whole House, because we all want to see the best possible use made of brownfield sites. I am confident that that is what we will see at Rushden Lakes.

Question put and agreed to.