A public consultation on possible changes to the planning system has highlighted concerns over MHK independence and big business bias.

There were 171 responses to the consultation, which included 38 organisations ranging from local authorities to government departments, preservation groups and building contractors.

Among the questions, was whether Tynwald approval should be continued, alongside public consultation into changes in planning policy.

This was overwhelmingly supported as nearly 70% of respondents, who agreed that, following public consultation, Tynwald must retain the final say on planning policy.

Reasons for this ranged from due democratic process, public input and prevention of arbitrary decision making.

There were, however, strong concerns raised by respondents, including the need to give planning committees more weight and not allow MHKs to overturn recommendations.

The most illuminating comment in the report was a perceived mistrust of MHKs, although these comments perhaps highlighted a general lack of knowledge regarding how the planning decision process works.

The report notes: ’There is concern that MHKs are not independent and that it discredits the system.’

While MHKs can, of course, change laws and policy, they don’t have a direct say on what gets planning permission.

The exception is the Minister for the Environment, Food and Agriculture, who can overrule planning recommendations.

This happened recently when the Minister, Geoffrey Boot, said that development at the End Cafe site in Laxey should be given the go-ahead despite the recommendation against from the planning inspector.

The report also highlights concerns as to the weight afforded to public opinion.

’Public engagement should not just be a paper exercise and weight should be given to it,’ the report says.

There were also claims the public were often ignored and even that local businesses ’seemed to be treated differently than wealthier developers’.

Policy and Reform Minister Chris Thomas MHK said of the summary report: ’I’d like to thank all those who took part in the public consultation. The responses will feed into a programme of improvement designed to meet the needs of our people and our economy, now and in the future.

’It is also worth noting that some of the issues highlighted in the consultation are covered by existing planning policy.

redevelopment

’For example, the Council of Ministers is committed to encouraging the redevelopment of urban sites through policies on temporary car parks and compulsory purchase powers.’

His words on compulsory purchasing will surely be welcomed by Douglas Council leader David Christian, who last week suggested that for redevelopment, government could use these powers to regenerate dilapidated parts of the capital such as Villiers Square.

In another question, respondents were asked whether planning exemptions should be expanded for telecoms development, due to the increasing need for faster broadband speeds and ability to change for technology.

However, this was rejected by respondents with 110, or 64%, opposing the idea, with some seeing health risks as a factor.

’The overwhelming response was that control was needed as masts have a high impact on visual amenity,’ the report says.

The consultation also asked whether the current approach of site assessment framework and assessment of individual sites remain integral to the development of an Area Plan or whether this could be simplified and changed to a ’criteria based approach’.

In this instance, the respondents chose overwhelmingly to continue with the current approach, with importance given to certainty for the development industry.

There were 171 responses to the consultation, which included 38 organisations ranging from local authorities to government departments, preservation groups and building contractors.