RTPI in Wales
RTPI yng Nghymru

RTPI
mediation of space - making of place

25 February 2003

Dear Sir / Madam

Patron HRH The Prince of Wales KG KT PC GCP

The Powers of the National Assembly for Wales: Issues & Questions for Consultation

I am writing in response to the above consultation document which appears on the Welsh Assembly Government's website under www.wales.gov.uk/subirichard/content/consultations/richard-commission-e.htm

The Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) is a professional institution and a registered charity which exists to further the art and science of town planning. It is a UK-wide body organised in branches. RTPI Cymru is a branch of the Institute covering Wales with approximately 850 members. These include employees of local government, other public bodies and the private sector. In addition the RTPI has associate members including housing associations, community planning groups and other organisations. The membership has a central role in securing sustainable development, including conserving and enhancing the environment, promoting thriving communities and supporting economic growth.

The consultation document has been considered through the Royal Town Planning Institute's Welsh Planning Policy Panel as well as through the RTPI Cymru Branch and as a result, I am able to offer the following views on the paper.

The powers of the Assembly have a direct impact on planning policy and implementation as well as on economic policy, and critically - resource planning and investment/funding.

The current responsibilities of the Assembly include the administration of the town and country planning system in Wales. Its activities include planning research and policy, supervision of the development plan system and the use of intervention powers in respect of specific cases. It has certain powers to prepare secondary legislation under the primary legislation for planning passed in Westminster. However, a significant feature of the planning system is that most day to day planning work, including plan making and development control decisions, is the responsibility of local planning authorities, with intervention by the Assembly in detailed matters being comparatively rare. There is also a substantial amount of European planning legislation, which applies UK-wide.

The powers of the Assembly in relation to planning impinge significantly on the work of RTPI members and more broadly on land use matters in Wales. The Assembly develops the general land use planning policies for Wales within which local plan making and decisions are made. While such policies are often similar to those for England, appropriate variation is made, such as policy guidance on planning and the Welsh language, guidance on calculating housing need and new Green Belt policy. The Assembly has also produced distinctive development plan arrangements for Wales and is developing an all-Wales Spatial Plan, both of which have gained wide support.

The Assembly thus has substantial scope to vary policies and plan making arrangements for Wales, when such discretion is allowed by primary legislation. There are, however, two distinct limitations on the present powers and on the opportunities to influence land use development in Wales:

1. As noted above, the discretion of the Assembly on policy and on administrative arrangements, normally set out in secondary legislation; can only be within the parameters set out in primary legislation. The Assembly is unable to develop significant initiatives of policy or arrangements to meet specific Welsh issues unless it can secure the agreement of the appropriate Whitehall department to allow for it in the relevant primary legislation. It is also unable to choose the timing for such legislation set by the priorities of the London Cabinet. In addition, there is a practical consideration limiting the scope for specific provision for Wales in Parliamentary legislation, namely the time constraints, which lead to only a limited number of clauses for Wales being accommodated.

2. The Assembly is able to exercise powers of policy and intervention in regard to most forms of land use development covered by Planning Acts and the Transport and Works Act. However, it has not been delegated such powers in relation to energy development (such as wind farms, wind energy generation over 50 MW and other power installations and distribution facilities), nor for most harbour developments, under the relevant Electricity Acts and Harbour Acts. Such powers remain with the DTI and Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in spite of Assembly requests to assume them. These limitations prevent the Assembly taking a lead role in relation to these important forms of development although they link closely to a range of other land use, transport, environmental and economic responsibilities already devolved.

It is recommended that:

1. Irrespective of a decision on primary legislation powers, the Assembly should be given policy, decision and intervention powers for Wales for developments under the Electricity Acts and the Harbour Acts, currently exercised by the DTI and the ODPM. The transfer of these powers should take place in the short term to complement existing Assembly functions and powers in relation to land use, transport, environment and economic issues.

2. The Assembly should be granted general powers to make primary legislation in relation to town and country planning, including related matters in present planning legislation such as advertisement control and listed buildings. Such a change would provide the assembly. with the capacity to decide its own timetable for changes to the planning system and the scope for change including novel solutions, without awaiting Whitehall decisions on timing or agreement to all detailed proposals. Although this may speed up the ability to create distinct Welsh policy issues, there is an inherent danger in developing a completely different planning regime in Wales as this could lead to confusion to the investment and property industry.

3. A further recommendation is that to reflect the more distinctive policies and arrangements for Wales deriving from acquiring primary legislative powers, there would be a need for Wales also to have its own Planning Inspectorate. Presently a single Planning Inspectorate covers England and Wales, with limited specific provision for Wales, while both Scotland and Northern Ireland already have their own arrangements. The cost of the Inspectorate services for Wales is already fully carried by the Assembly and to ensure that the Assembly can achieve arrangements which are fully responsive to policies and arrangements for Wales, it should establish its own Inspectorate based on the successful Scottish model, (although arrangements for mutual exchange of specialist Inspectors UK-wide could usefully be developed).

In respect of taxation powers, the Institute has no observations on the issue of varying the rates of income tax. However, any proposal to extend the powers of the Assembly to formulate primary legislation for the planning system should ensure that there is clarity on the control by the Assembly of related fiscal matters such as charges levied by local planning authorities for planning applications and by the Planning Inspectorate for its services. There should also be clarity on the transfer of powers to regulate planning gain, including its final dimension, i.e. the ability of local planning authorities to require certain works or payments related to the impact of new developments.

The present arrangements of the National Assembly, viewed from the outside, appear to be quasiparliamentary. Although the Assembly is a corporate body, its detailed working arrangements already involve some separation of the legislative and executive functions. Such a separation on a parliamentary model is a widely understood system and would be likely to be more stable for a prolonged period than maintaining the present 'corporate in name, but not in reality' system.

A change to a parliamentary system would require a range of detailed changes:

• For clarity the Assembly should be called a parliament, to clarify its different status from evolving regional arrangements in England, and its members be titled WMP (as with Scotland's SMPs) and its Cabinet allowed to use the titles First Minister and Ministers.

• Clarity is important. The recent decision to distinguish the Welsh Assembly Government from the National Assembly for Wales has been confusing and costly with no real evidence that it improves either democracy or decision making. It is felt that any further development of power should not mean more complex structures or layers of decision-making.

• Provision should be made for appropriate Bill Scrutiny Committees on a task and finish basis. In addition the role of the present subject committees should be clarified with a greater emphasis on their scrutiny and investigation role similar to that of Parliamentary Select Committees.

• The greater legislative and committee workload is likely to lead to a need to increase the number of elected members. However this could be a highly emotive issue on the basis of perceived additional cost. It is therefore desirable that any increase in membership should be limited to the minimum necessary level. Reducing the generous length of Assembly member holidays could help achieve the additional workload with that minimal increase in membership. Possibly an increase of 5 members to a total of 65 would be appropriate. Rather than focus on increasing numbers of AMs in Wales, more emphasis should be placed on how AMs spend their time. Current two three and a half-hour plenary sessions per week, plus one two and a half-hour committee meetings to attend does not represent the best use of their time.

Experience in the planning field has been mainly limited to the present Planning Bill. Without being party to internal discussion it is unclear how much influence the Assembly has had over most clauses that are common to England and Wales. However, there are a few clauses, which make specific proposals for Wales indicating that the Assembly has had some success in convincing the lead Whitehall department of the need to include provision for Wales. The timing, amendment and progress of the clauses will, however, be outside the control of the Assembly, which can only seek to influence indirectly via the office of the Secretary of state or MPs.

The only clear advantage would appear to be that joint primary legislation with limited specific provision for Wales limits resource demands on the Assembly. Greater staff and member resources could be needed for primary legislation. There may also be arguments that having common elements to the planning system in England and Wales would be an advantage in securing development. However, if legislative power were devolved, the common background of European legislation, the likelihood that the Assembly would only seek innovative approaches where needed and its awareness of the development sector (as well as Scottish experience) would suggest that this would not be a major problem.

Disadvantages of the current system are the lack of Assembly control over the timing; scope and detail of changes needed to meet special planning issues in Wales. Such a lack of powers is also likely to reduce the attractiveness of standing for election to a number of potential AMs, who may feel that their opportunity to promote significant change is limited. Additional powers would encourage high calibre candidates. In contrast, some MPs from Wales and Peers from a Welsh background may regret a lesser role in relation to Wales but the wide scope for their input on nondevolved matters should reduce this.

Overall there would be a gain for Wales through the Assembly, with its greater closeness to issues, problems and opportunities, being able to pursue appropriate solutions within its own timescale. For organisations such as the RTPI it would also enable them, through the Assembly's established inclusive approach to policy development, to input to discussion and solutions.

Welsh MPs could be in danger of extinction if powers were transferred and this would lead to isolation if there were a different power in Parliament to that of the Assembly. There should be clear advantages for AMs and MPs to ensure that quality candidates are still attracted to both roles.

Although the role of Welsh MPs in regard to devolved issues would be reduced, they would have increased capacity to play an active role in non-devolved matters and could secure greater Welsh influence on the those matters.

It would appear that the present role of the Secretary of State does not depend to a significant extent on facilitating specific legislative arrangements for Wales, although such work is clearly important when it takes place. The removal of that role would leave the other parts of the Secretary of State's role intact, such as work in relation to Assembly funding, and representing Welsh interests in Cabinet. Experience from Scotland would be a model for a continuing role.

Wales must continue to maintain links and working relationships with Westminster. The Assembly does not have the same level of resources nor - in some areas - the expertise in its policy-making capabilities to undertake primary research nor to create new initiatives.

Before considering whether there is a need to move to a different form of devolution in Wales, baseline evidence is required to determine whether the current system has failed to meet the priorities in Wales. If there is evidence to suggest that it has failed (or is failing), then an evaluation is required to ascertain how and where it has failed, and whether there have been any delays in implementation under the current system.

It is also important to fully understand the potential different priorities and to undertake a cost/benefit analysis on which aspects would be beneficial and by how much (what value) if Wales could do things differently.

It is suggested that the key tests should focus on whether the present or proposed system presents a model that is:

Effective in being able to respond to issues in Wales in a timely and appropriate manner;

Comprehensible to the general public as well as to administrators and thus capable of winning clear support;

Stable in offering Wales a settled pattern of administration which does not lead to ongoing calls for continuing change which would distract attention from more day-to-day issues;

Economical in avoiding any step change in administrative costs;

Any revised arrangement should meet all four criteria.

The Institute has no objections to these comments being made public. I hope that these observations prove useful, but if you require further clarification please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours faithfully

Rebecca Phillips
Welsh Planning Policy Officer