| Planning and Compulsory Purchase
|
|
Matthew Green: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Amendment No. 132, in
'(c) Include details of the steps to be taken to meet the access needs of disabled people.'.
'(j) the steps to be taken by the RPB to ensure the draft revision and appraisal under section 5 furthers the social inclusion/access needs of disabled people.'.
'(c) The authority's policies for meeting the access needs of disabled people'.
'(ff) how it will meet the access needs of disabled people.'.
'including how the Plan will meet the access needs of disabled people'.
Column Number: 233 has given us the wording, and the briefing behind it. I hope that the Government will leap at the opportunity to meet their own manifesto commitment.New clause 30 requires developers to submit an access statement with their planning application demonstrating how their scheme will be accessible and exclusive, and gives the planning authorities a statutory duty to have special regard to the needs of disabled people when considering planning applications. Amendment No. 132 requires regional spatial strategies to include details of how they will meet the access needs of disabled people. Amendment. No. 147 would ensure that the regulations made provision for the steps to be taken by the regional planning body to ensure that the draft provision and appraisal under section 5 furthered the social inclusion and access needs of disabled people. Amendment. No. 173 requires local development plans in Wales to include details of how they will meet the access needs of disabled people. Amendment. No 148 requires local development schemes to specify how they will meet the access needs of disabled people, and amendment No. 172 requires the Welsh spatial plan to include details of the policies of the National Assembly for Wales for meeting the access needs of disabled people. I could speak at length on this subject, not least because I have been provided with an extensive briefing. I hope that the Minister will accept the thrust of it, and I shall not have to quote the reasons why she should accept it. Not wanting to detain the Committee so that we can move on, and—I hope—get the Government's acceptance, I shall leave it at that. Mr. Clifton-Brown: We, too, considered the question of access for disabled people. We tabled many amendments similar to those of the hon. Gentleman, but he got there first, so his amendments were selected. In principle, in the plan-making process, it is absolutely right that there should be full consideration of access for disabled people, which we wholeheartedly support. Every planning applicant should be expected at least to consider this matter. However, I have a slight concern that if we go completely over the top, we could involve the country in a huge cost that is not required. I shall give the hon. Gentleman an example. To require every house in a housing estate development to provide access to disabled people would clearly be an unnecessary use of resources, but requiring a proportion of those houses to provide such access might be reasonable. We need to keep a sense of proportion and strike a balance in dealing with this subject. Having said that, I am hugely sympathetic to the hon. Gentleman's amendments. I hope that the Government will also be sympathetic to them and that they will honour their manifesto commitments.
11.15 amYvette Cooper: I shall not repeat the purpose and effect of the new clause and amendments, which have already been set out by hon. Members, but I should say that I have considerable sympathy for the intentions behind them. I met representatives of the DRC and Column Number: 234 other groups to discuss the issue. They cited as an example of the problem that concerned them the London Mayor's building, which was designed throughout to be accessible to wheelchairs, and to promote pedestrian access and sustainable development over car use. They pointed out that, perversely, it is actually very difficult to get to by car if one is disabled. They argued that issues relating to access and disability should therefore be considered at the beginning of the planning process rather than at the end. I must say that I find their arguments very persuasive.I will set out how we are seeking to respond to these concerns. New clause 30 seeks to include in the Bill a requirement for access statements for all sorts of planning permission, but clause 41 already introduces new powers to make an order. The order can specify the form and the manner in which a planning application must be made, what must be included in an application, and the documents and other material that must accompany it. Those powers are intended to introduce the standard application form for all local planning authorities. Before making any prescription, we obviously want to seek stakeholders' views on the forms as part of our proposed consultation, which is due around the turn of the year. I must not prejudge that consultation, but a strong case has been made for including an access statement as one of the documents that would accompany the form in appropriate cases. Such an access statement would be a way of ensuring that developers are aware of disability issues at the beginning, rather than the end, of the process. This statement is probably a more appropriate way of achieving access than including the requirement in the Bill, because it allows for greater flexibility to respond to new issues that arise over time, which is exactly how we deal with much of the work within the planning framework. Amendments Nos. 132, 173, 148 and 172 require regional spatial strategies, local development schemes, local development plans in Wales and the Wales spatial plan to include details of how they will meet the access needs of disabled people. However, clause 38 already places a statutory requirement on those responsible for preparing the regional spatial strategies, the local development documents and local development plans to undertake these functions with a view to contributing to the achievement of sustainable development. This will be defined in PPS1—planning policy statement 1—which we hope to issue in draft for consultation very shortly. PPS1 will set out four objectives for sustainable development: economic development, social inclusion, protection of the environment and prudent use of resources. It will refer explicitly to issues relating to meeting the needs of those with disabilities, and will make it clear that planning authorities should consider how their plans address the four objectives for sustainable development, which should include social inclusion. They should also seek to develop policies to optimise outcomes that deliver across all those objectives. Column Number: 235 PPS1 will also make it clear that the impact of development on the social fabric of communities will be taken into account. Factors such as the provision of social facilities, public space, accessibility and diversity will all need to be considered. As I have said, that will include taking into account access issues and the needs of disabled people and other groups such as black and minority ethnic groups and other disadvantaged groups. I have a personal interest in ensuring that social inclusion also means access for pushchairs, given the number of shops, railway stations and other buildings where manoeuvring a pushchair can be difficult. Regional spatial strategies and local development documents need to reflect the aims of sustainable development, including access and inclusion. Local authorities will determine applications in line with the development plan, so policies for sustainable development will set the framework for decisions on planning applications. The recently published consultation drafts of PPS11 and PPS12 set out how sustainable development considerations can be addressed in regional and local plans. Amendment No. 147 would enable the Secretary of State to make regulations specifying the steps to be taken by the regional planning body to ensure that the draft revision of the regional spatial strategy and the accompanying sustainability appraisal would further the social inclusion and access needs of disabled people. Clauses 5(4) and 18(5) would already require a sustainability appraisal of the proposals in a plan, at the preparation stage. The appraisal is intended to test the performance of a plan against the objectives of sustainable development as set out in PPS1, and to provide a basis for improvement. In the light of that, the sustainability appraisal will need to take account of any consequences for disabled people's access. Many of the issues encompassed by the amendments are already included in existing proposals. I am thinking of PPS1 in particular, but also PPS11 and PPS12, which set out issues relating to access to documents and processes. It is our clear intention that people with disabilities should have an early opportunity to influence the content of regional spatial strategy and local development documents. In addition, the recently published draft regulations, to be made under parts 1 and 2 of the Bill, make it clear that regional planning Column Number: 236 bodies and local planning authorities will be required formally to consult certain bodies, including those that represent people with disabilities.We intend, through clause 38 in particular, to ensure that the planning process is inclusive and that at every stage account is taken of the needs of people with disabilities. I recognise the concerns of hon. Members, the Disability Rights Commission and other disabilities groups. The approach to the planning framework has always been to put the outline in legislation, while many of the most important issues are dealt with in the planning policy guidance and planning policy statements, or other guidance and regulations, so that there is flexibility to respond to new concerns. For example, issues relating to renewable energy, planning out crime, design, brownfield rather than greenfield sites, and retail development are set out in guidance rather than in legislation. Green belt policy itself is in PPG2. Yet all those issues are powerfully taken into account in the planning process.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2003 | Prepared 21 October 2003 |
