Whilst the Infrastructure Planning Commission is set to continue until possibly as long as April 2012, the planning regime for infrastructure projects is set for further change as the Government seeks to ratify its National Policy Statements (by Spring 2011) and brings forward its Decentralisation & Localism Bill. The Bill will see the abolition of the IPC (to be merged into the Planning Inspectorate), devolution of greater powers to local authorities but with final decisions on major projects resting with the Secretary of State.
Ideally, the Government wants to see the best parts of the 2008 Planning Act (NPSs, statutory timetables and a single consenting regime) to dovetail with the Decentralisation & Localism Bill.
In the autumn of next year, it is conceivable that there will be three different consenting processes running concurrently for major energy projects: (1) applications lodged before the establishment of the IPC still going through the old ‘Section 36’ regime, (2) projects taken forward under the IPC framework: presently 48 out of the 54 projects (of which 80% are energy related) registered with the IPC are still at the pre-application stage and (3) projects that will be processed under the Major Infrastructure Planning Unit regime created by the Decentralisation and Localism Act Bill. This is set to go live in October 2011.
In practice, much of the IPC process and personnel are likely to remain in situ under a new name, with a Secretary of State, rather than an IPC commissioner giving the final seal of approval.
The IPC appears to be working “business as usual”: receiving applications, offering advice to developers and council planners as well as outreach work to local communities. Although the transition period is in their sights, the IPC are hopeful that the first batch of decisions will be made by the middle of next year.
Irrespective of the planning regime that is in place, public consultation is enshrined. Communication has always been a vital part of a successful consents process. Open dialogue with elected representatives and local communities and interest groups has always been necessary but now it is a statutory requirement.
Too often, the myths and fears of a proposed project become the biggest obstacle, and any barrier between the local community and the developer can lead to distrust and disapproval. Similarly, local politicians and officers can be lost straight away if the project is felt to have landed upon them with no warning. A proper introduction, not only to the project but the company as well, can ensure that the merits of any scheme have an increased chance of being heard.
Communication with the local community is vital, no matter how big a development is, as a groundswell against a proposed scheme at local level can be a project killer or at the very least be costly. Genuine dialogue is needed.
