← Back to House of Commons Debates
Planning Process: Probity
11 June 2020
Lead MP
Steve Reed
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
Standards & Ethics
Other Contributors: 27
At a Glance
Steve Reed raised concerns about planning process: probity in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
Steve Reed questioned the public confidence in the probity of the planning process, highlighting an unlawful decision made by the Secretary of State regarding the Westferry development. He raised concerns about apparent bias due to conversations with a donor, the timing of decisions, and donations made after the decision.
Steve Reed
Lab Co-op
Streatham and Croydon North
He questioned the Secretary of State's actions regarding the Westferry development, citing bias due to conversations with a donor, the timing of decisions that could avoid taxes, and donations made after the decision. He demanded full transparency over all documents related to this decision.
10:34:00
Minister emphasised the clarity of criteria for central Government involvement in planning decisions, noting that only a small proportion of cases are referred to Ministers. He highlighted that 26 out of 447,000 cases were decided by Ministers last year and defended the Secretary of State's actions regarding Westferry, stating there was no impropriety or bias.
Greg Smith
Con
Mid Buckinghamshire
Smith inquired about steps to address a lack of ambition from Labour-run City Hall for house building in London. He sought the Minister's outline on how to improve planning system efficacy in the capital.
Alan Brown
Ind
10:34:00
Brown criticised the situation as resembling the Dominic Cummings affair, emphasising serious questions about donations and decision-making. He questioned why the Secretary of State overruled local council decisions and planning inspector advice, suggesting a lack of public confidence.
Kevin Hollinrake
Con
Thirsk and Malton
Asked about plans to increase affordable housing through the first homes programme, particularly for key workers.
Clive Betts
Lab
Sheffield South East
Called for transparency in decision-making processes and requested relevant documentation for proper consideration by the Select Committee.
Critiqued Labour mayors for failing to meet housing targets and suggested that only Conservatives get it right on housing.
Rachel Hopkins
Lab
Luton South and South Bedfordshire
Asked about the timing of a donation from Mr Desmond and its relation to the Secretary of State's decision, questioning the probity of the planning process.
Emphasised the importance of social housing in his life and asked how to ensure the planning process respects local communities' needs while improving standards of social housing.
Tan Dhesi
Lab
Slough
Questioned whether Mr Desmond's presence at a dinner with the Secretary of State influenced the decision-making process and who was misleading people regarding this issue.
Asked about steps being taken to protect heritage assets in the planning system, specifically referencing the Guildhall in Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Raised concerns over the legality of the decision and asked for all documents relevant to this case to be released for public scrutiny.
Welcomed additional investment in the affordable homes programme from the Budget and sought assurances that developers will continue to meet their obligations regarding affordable units.
Liz Twist
Lab
Blaydon and Consett
Given that the Prime Minister pushed through the original scheme for the same developer when he was Mayor of London, did No. 10 have any involvement in events or conversations leading to the Secretary of State’s unlawful decision to grant approval?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
With respect to the hon. Lady, she is wrong. That was an entirely different application. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was determined to leave a legacy in London of more homes—more of the right homes in the right places—so that people could live the lives they wanted to live. In comparison, the present Mayor of London is missing his own targets and the Government’s targets. It is the reason we have had to call in his plan—to demonstrate that he must do better.
Bury South
I thank the Minister for his responses on this very important topic. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (James Daly) for raising his concerns about the green belt, which I share. With public engagement in the planning process at an all-time low, because meetings are now held online or not at all, what advice is the Minister giving to planning authorities to maximise public probity and prevent any decision from being steamrollered through?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
As I said in my opening remarks, planning is essentially a local matter. The vast majority of local planning decisions are made locally. Sometimes they are appealed against to the Planning Inspectorate, but only on a small number occasions will those applications come to a Secretary of State. I am very keen to ensure that the planning system is swift, transparent and reflects and adheres to local needs, and I shall make sure that my hon. Friend’s comments and concerns are properly reflected in all our considerations about planning processes.
Warrington North
Campaigners in Warrington North have been battling to save Peel Hall from development for over three decades. With planning law already weighted so heavily in favour of development, what assurances can the Minister give that the developer cannot simply make a substantial donation to the Conservative party to subvert the process and that residents will get the fair hearing they deserve and can have confidence in that process?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
The planning law in this country is very clear, as the hon. Lady knows. I suggest that she go and read it.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the probity of the planning system has been enhanced by the Secretary of State’s decision to proceed with South Oxfordshire District Council’s local plan and that the holding of an examination in public online is a very good, transparent way of proceeding?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
Virtual proceedings are an effective way of ensuring that the light of public interest shines upon planning decisions, and I think the decision made in respect of South Oxfordshire was the right one. As I have said before, we will act always with fairness and probity, but we will also act to make sure that the Government’s objectives to build more homes in the right places—the sorts of homes people want and need—are met.
Florence Eshalomi
Lab Co-op
Vauxhall and Camberwell Green
When I was elected to the council, one of the first things I did was sit on a planning committee. Does the Minister agree that transparency in that quasi-judicial role is really important, especially when constituents still feel there is a lot of secrecy around the planning process? Does he believe that there needs to be that full, transparent process in order not to undermine the planning system for our constituents?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
I certainly agree that transparency in planning is important. That is why the decisions that Ministers make, if they are involved in those planning decisions, are properly published and open to full public scrutiny, as they have been in the case that the hon. Member for Croydon North (Steve Reed) has raised.
Like the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Florence Eshalomi), I sat on my local planning committee and in my training I learned that only the most contentious of applications, or those of national significance, come before the Minister. We have an example on our doorstep, just over the road, where the 50-storey St George’s Tower was granted by John Prescott against the wishes of the local council. Can the Minister clarify why certain applications require a ministerial decision?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
There are some applications which, because of the number of homes, will involve a ministerial decision. Other applications, which are timed out because the local authority has not been able to come to a determination and the applicant appeals, also come before a Minister. That happens in a small number of cases. It happened in the Westferry case, but I remind the House, because I think it bears repetition, that the issue came before the Secretary of State because the local authority failed to make a determination. It came before the previous Secretary of State in the early part of last year and went through the normal adjudication process in MHCLG.
Wera Hobhouse
Lib Dem
Bath
In my constituency, the local planning authority has just rejected a planning application aimed at reducing the number of affordable housing units. What confidence can my constituents have that the Government will not overrule that decision? Most importantly, should Ministers who are making planning decisions not be under the same obligation as local councillors working on planning decisions to declare personal and prejudicial interests?
Christopher Pincher
10:34:00
Ministers are obliged to adhere to the ministerial code and the MHCLG proprietary and ethics policy. We will build the homes that we think people need. We are going to spend £12 billion on the affordable homes programme to ensure that the right sort of homes are built in the right places. It is for the local authority, whichever local authority it is, to determine need and to bid for some of that AHP money if it wishes to build socially rented homes. Homes England will also take bids from applicants to build homes according to the land supply of local authorities. Let us see what the hon. Lady’s local authority achieves. I trust that it will build the right sorts of homes for the people of Bath.
Government Response
Minister defended the Secretary of State's actions regarding the Westferry development, stating there was no impropriety or bias. He highlighted that only a small proportion of cases are referred to Ministers and emphasised the clarity of criteria for central Government involvement. Defended the Secretary of State's decision, stating it was based on merits and in the interests of local people. Repeatedly emphasised transparency and fairness in the decision-making process. Virtual proceedings are an effective way of ensuring that the light of public interest shines upon planning decisions, and I think the decision made in respect of South Oxfordshire was the right one. As I have said before, we will act always with fairness and probity, but we will also act to make sure that the Government’s objectives to build more homes in the right places—the sorts of homes people want and need—are met.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.