Ministerial Statement on the Planning Bill

• 30th October 2013
• Latest News
• 0 Comments
• mkaplanning

The Environment Minister, Mark H Durkan, has confirmed that he will not move his Planning Bill because of legal concerns.  He said amendments to the bill backed by the DUP and Sinn Fein could run counter to the European Convention on Human Rights. He also told the assembly that he had planning and economic concerns.

In June the assembly passed amendments giving the first and deputy first ministers’ potential power to set up Special Economic Planning Zones. The amendments would have effectively allowed a planning free-for-all in areas designated by the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister.

Other changes limited the grounds on which objectors could secure Judicial Reviews to challenge planning decisions in court. Under the amendments, objectors to planning decisions would only have been able to seek a judicial review where there was an alleged conflict with European law. It would have removed the court’s ability to review the legality, rationality and reasonableness of planning decisions and cut the time limit for judicial review from three months to six weeks.

However, the proposals were opposed by the former environment minister, Alex Attwood, who saw them as a power grab. Mr Durkan told MLA’s the ability of people to challenge decisions in court is a fundamental right of citizens.  He said that legal advice was that the bill was unlawful and would be a breach of human rights.

Clauses 10 & 20 of the Bill have also subsequently been scrapped

Clause 20, Fixed Penalties, would have allowed the Department of the Environment to issue a fixed penalty notice for the offences of failing to comply with an enforcement action. This clause would have potentially undermined credibility by limiting the opportunities for enforcement action, already seen as a weak part of the Northern Ireland planning system. While on the one hand the fixed penalty notice promised to allow swift action against those who failed to comply with enforcement, once a fine had been paid, the Bill suggested they then be immune from any further prosecution.

Clause 10 of the Bill, Public inquiries: major planning applications allowed the appointment of people other than the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) to oversee planning inquiries.

Mr Durkan said he had decided not to proceed with the act as a whole, because he believed this was a quicker means of pushing forward planning reform than attempting to remove the amendments. He will now seek to include aspects of the Bill which was originally designed to speed up planning reforms in the Single Strategic Planning Policy Statement, which is expected in draft form by “the turn of the year“.

To read the official report click here.