Planning decision-making: independence, subsidiarity, impartiality and the state

Adam Sheppard, Heather Ritchie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper explores recent changes that involve the Planning Inspectorate in England, considering aspart of this the relevance and value of independence and impartiality in effective decision-making,together with a consideration of the significance of these changes in the context of localism and thesubsidiarity narrative. To inform this debate, this paper focuses upon the value of having an independentbody for planning decisions through a comparison with the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) inNorthern Ireland. The paper points towards the potential need for change in the structural approachand arrangements of the system in England, drawing particularly upon the PAC as a potential modelfor consideration.Keywords: appeals, independence, impartiality, subsidiarity, integrity, localism, courts, perceptions
LanguageEnglish
Pages53-70
JournalTown Planning Review
Volume1
Issue number87
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2016

Fingerprint

subsidiarity
decision making
appeal
planning
Ireland
integrity
Values
narrative

Keywords

  • appeals
  • independence
  • impartiality
  • subsidiarity
  • integrity
  • localism
  • courts
  • perceptions

Cite this

@article{0f080ddeeab9449d8e741485b7d312e6,
title = "Planning decision-making: independence, subsidiarity, impartiality and the state",
abstract = "This paper explores recent changes that involve the Planning Inspectorate in England, considering aspart of this the relevance and value of independence and impartiality in effective decision-making,together with a consideration of the significance of these changes in the context of localism and thesubsidiarity narrative. To inform this debate, this paper focuses upon the value of having an independentbody for planning decisions through a comparison with the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) inNorthern Ireland. The paper points towards the potential need for change in the structural approachand arrangements of the system in England, drawing particularly upon the PAC as a potential modelfor consideration.Keywords: appeals, independence, impartiality, subsidiarity, integrity, localism, courts, perceptions",
keywords = "appeals, independence, impartiality, subsidiarity, integrity, localism, courts, perceptions",
author = "Adam Sheppard and Heather Ritchie",
note = "Reference text: References BARKER, K. (2006), Review of Land Use Planning, London, HMSO. BOOTH, P. (2003), Planning By Consent: The Origins and Nature of British Development Control, London, Routledge. CPRE (CAMPAIGN TO PROTECT RURAL ENGLAND) (2004), The Facts About Planning Appeals, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/housing-and-planning/planning/item/1905- (accessed 15 October 2014). COUNCIL OF EUROPE (2010), European Convention on Human Rights, www.echr.coe.int/ Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf (accessed 15 October 2014). ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE (2000a), The Environmental Court Project: Final Report by Malcolm Grant, London, The Stationery Office. ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE (2000b), Thirteenth Report – The Planning Inspectorate and Public Inquiries – Volume 1 – Report and Proceedings of the Committee, London, The Stationery Office. EPSTEIN, R. (2007), ‘Is the parole board sufficiently independent? R (on the application of Michael Brooke and Gagik Ter-Ogannisyan) v The Parole Board’, The Times, 18 October 2007. LLOYD, G. M. and PEEL, D. (2012), ‘Planning reform in Northern Ireland: Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011’, Planning Theory & Practice, 13, 177–82. MCAUSLAN, P. (1980), The Ideologies of Planning Law, Oxford, Pergamon Press. MURTAGH, B. (2001), ‘Integrated social housing in Northern Ireland’, Housing Studies, 16, 771–89. PLANNING INSPECTORATE (2012), Code of Conduct, www.planningportal.gov.uk/ uploads/...inspectors/code_of_conduct.pdf (accessed 15 October 2014). ROZEE, L. (2000), ‘The work of the Planning Inspectorate – Moving into the new millennium, address to Planning Summer School. TURNER, S. (2006), ‘Transforming environmental governance in Northern Ireland. Part one: the process of policy renewal’, Journal of Environmental Law, 18, 55–87. UK GOVERNMENT (1968), Town and Country Planning Act 1968, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (1991), Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (2011), Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (2013), Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (2014), Planning Bill (Northern Ireland) 2014, London, HMSO. 70 Adam Sheppard and Heather Ritchie WARTH, T. (2012), ‘National or local: where should planning appeals be decided?’ MA dissertation, University of the West of England (unpublished). WILLEY, S. (2005), ‘Are planning appeal rights necessary? A comparative study of Australia, England and Vancouver BC’, Progress in Planning, 63, 265–320. WILLEY, S. (2007), ‘Planning appeal processes: reflections on a comparative study’, Environment and Planning, 39, 1676–98. WRAITH, R. E. and LAMB, G. B. (1971), Public Inquiries as an Instrument of Government, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd.",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3828/tpr.2016.4",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "53--70",
journal = "Town Planning Review",
issn = "0041-0020",
number = "87",

}

Planning decision-making: independence, subsidiarity, impartiality and the state. / Sheppard, Adam; Ritchie, Heather.

In: Town Planning Review, Vol. 1, No. 87, 01.04.2016, p. 53-70.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Planning decision-making: independence, subsidiarity, impartiality and the state

AU - Sheppard, Adam

AU - Ritchie, Heather

N1 - Reference text: References BARKER, K. (2006), Review of Land Use Planning, London, HMSO. BOOTH, P. (2003), Planning By Consent: The Origins and Nature of British Development Control, London, Routledge. CPRE (CAMPAIGN TO PROTECT RURAL ENGLAND) (2004), The Facts About Planning Appeals, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/housing-and-planning/planning/item/1905- (accessed 15 October 2014). COUNCIL OF EUROPE (2010), European Convention on Human Rights, www.echr.coe.int/ Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf (accessed 15 October 2014). ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE (2000a), The Environmental Court Project: Final Report by Malcolm Grant, London, The Stationery Office. ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE (2000b), Thirteenth Report – The Planning Inspectorate and Public Inquiries – Volume 1 – Report and Proceedings of the Committee, London, The Stationery Office. EPSTEIN, R. (2007), ‘Is the parole board sufficiently independent? R (on the application of Michael Brooke and Gagik Ter-Ogannisyan) v The Parole Board’, The Times, 18 October 2007. LLOYD, G. M. and PEEL, D. (2012), ‘Planning reform in Northern Ireland: Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011’, Planning Theory & Practice, 13, 177–82. MCAUSLAN, P. (1980), The Ideologies of Planning Law, Oxford, Pergamon Press. MURTAGH, B. (2001), ‘Integrated social housing in Northern Ireland’, Housing Studies, 16, 771–89. PLANNING INSPECTORATE (2012), Code of Conduct, www.planningportal.gov.uk/ uploads/...inspectors/code_of_conduct.pdf (accessed 15 October 2014). ROZEE, L. (2000), ‘The work of the Planning Inspectorate – Moving into the new millennium, address to Planning Summer School. TURNER, S. (2006), ‘Transforming environmental governance in Northern Ireland. Part one: the process of policy renewal’, Journal of Environmental Law, 18, 55–87. UK GOVERNMENT (1968), Town and Country Planning Act 1968, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (1991), Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (2011), Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (2013), Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013, London, HMSO. UK GOVERNMENT (2014), Planning Bill (Northern Ireland) 2014, London, HMSO. 70 Adam Sheppard and Heather Ritchie WARTH, T. (2012), ‘National or local: where should planning appeals be decided?’ MA dissertation, University of the West of England (unpublished). WILLEY, S. (2005), ‘Are planning appeal rights necessary? A comparative study of Australia, England and Vancouver BC’, Progress in Planning, 63, 265–320. WILLEY, S. (2007), ‘Planning appeal processes: reflections on a comparative study’, Environment and Planning, 39, 1676–98. WRAITH, R. E. and LAMB, G. B. (1971), Public Inquiries as an Instrument of Government, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - This paper explores recent changes that involve the Planning Inspectorate in England, considering aspart of this the relevance and value of independence and impartiality in effective decision-making,together with a consideration of the significance of these changes in the context of localism and thesubsidiarity narrative. To inform this debate, this paper focuses upon the value of having an independentbody for planning decisions through a comparison with the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) inNorthern Ireland. The paper points towards the potential need for change in the structural approachand arrangements of the system in England, drawing particularly upon the PAC as a potential modelfor consideration.Keywords: appeals, independence, impartiality, subsidiarity, integrity, localism, courts, perceptions

AB - This paper explores recent changes that involve the Planning Inspectorate in England, considering aspart of this the relevance and value of independence and impartiality in effective decision-making,together with a consideration of the significance of these changes in the context of localism and thesubsidiarity narrative. To inform this debate, this paper focuses upon the value of having an independentbody for planning decisions through a comparison with the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) inNorthern Ireland. The paper points towards the potential need for change in the structural approachand arrangements of the system in England, drawing particularly upon the PAC as a potential modelfor consideration.Keywords: appeals, independence, impartiality, subsidiarity, integrity, localism, courts, perceptions

KW - appeals

KW - independence

KW - impartiality

KW - subsidiarity

KW - integrity

KW - localism

KW - courts

KW - perceptions

U2 - 10.3828/tpr.2016.4

DO - 10.3828/tpr.2016.4

M3 - Article

VL - 1

SP - 53

EP - 70

JO - Town Planning Review

T2 - Town Planning Review

JF - Town Planning Review

SN - 0041-0020

IS - 87

ER -