The government has accepted amendments to draft planning legislation to allow greater scrutiny of the new scheme of national planning directives.

Planning committee chairman Tim Baker successfully tabled a number of amendments to the Town and County Planning (Amendment) Bill last week.

But an attempt to add substance to a planning law provision for a consultative body - a provision that is currently in place but has been roundly ignored by successive governments - was defeated.

During an earlier debate on the bill Mr Baker (pictured) said he supported the idea behind the creation of a national policy directives scheme, as a means of the government reacting quickly to an economic or social need.

But he had concerns at the process, saying the Council of Ministers would be able to override established planning policy without proper scrutiny.

His amendments, which were accepted by Policy and Reform Minister Chris Thomas, put in place guarantees that the government would have to consult and that Tynwald would have a greater say.

Mr Baker said: ’These amendments provide a package of changes. This package of changes improves, among other things, the transparency and robustness of the national policy directives.

’They enhance the consultation that is required and clarify the Tynwald approval processes around national policy directives.’

Instead of the Council of Ministers merely consulting who it ’thinks fit’, the wording has been changed to say that it should hold a public consultation.

He also placed a five-year sunset clause on any national policy directive.

Amendment

A further amendment tabled by Bill Shimmins (Middle), spelled out exactly where the government should advertise proposed national policy directives, including in newspapers and online.

Mr Thomas said all of these amendments were ’helpful’.

’The main point of national policy directives is that we need a transparent and robust but flexible and responsive process,’ he said. ’I think each of these amendments helps to make each of those things achievable.’

But a bid by Mr Shimmins to place a consultative body on a statutory footing was unsuccessful.

He pointed out that the present planning law called upon the Council of Ministers to set up a consultative body to obtain the views of organisations on matters relating to the environment, economy and planning and development.

But the body had never been set up in 20 years.

The same provision is contained in the new bill, but Mr Shimmins wanted to replace the wording so that rather than CoMin may set up the body, it would be required to.

’This really boils down to whether you feel we have an obligation or not,’ he said.

’I believe we have an obligation to the previous act and to our environment to set up a consultative body to help us look at these issues in the round alongside, as the act says, economic and planning considerations.’

But others argued there had been no demand for the body to be set up.

Mr Shimmins’ amendment was defeated by 17 votes to five, with Mr Shimmins, Lawrie Hooper (LibVannin, Ramsey), Daphne Caine (Garff), Clare Bettison (Douglas East) and Rob Peake (Douglas North) in favour.