Planning not sitting idle
I REFER to the article published on Tuesday in the Guernsey Press regarding Planning & Building Control. I would be grateful if you would publish this email in full as my response.
I am at a loss why I spent so much time explaining to both of your journalists about the excellent work that Planning & Building Control are doing during this crisis and yet none of that activity is mentioned. Instead, incorrect information is used which results in such an unbalanced article.
Firstly, the article refers to three applications received. This is incorrect as this number relates only to those published, not those received. Our team is extremely busy dealing with applications received, ensuring they are complete and ready to be decided subject to the required publicity. We are unable to publish any applications received until we know the public can have access to Sir Charles Frossard House – something which is beyond the control of the DPA.
Secondly, all the references to States debates were discussing the barriers faced by committees during the capital project process which comes before planning processes, yet the reader is left with the clear implication from your article that the planners are doing nothing and we are the barrier.
Your journalist talks about one small amendment to the legislation to remove the need for four paper copies; this is a gross simplification. The planning department has been one of the first areas to be considered for digitisation as part of the Smart Guernsey programme. I am advised by the chief information officer that they have completed the discovery phase and, just before the lockdown, developed a business case for delivery. As with many parts of the States, they are reviewing this with a view to identifying which parts can be accelerated as a direct response to Covid-19 and to support remote working and service delivery through this period. The wider transformation will be subject to priorities that will need to be part of the wider recovery strategy.
Here is a note of what I said, which I prepared just after the conversation with your journalist which sets out what we are doing:
. That it needs to be recognised that planning staff are going the extra mile to provide as smooth a service as possible, and criticism without that acknowledgement is unfair to the whole civil service, not just planning.
. That the decision on the 21 days’ publicity was the political members’, not staff, and was made balancing the interests of applicant and representor – I went into some detail about the lack of ability of some shielding, self-isolating, etc. since early March and that we’ve had positive feedback.
. That we were looking at many different ways to provide the planning service during lockdown, including how we would open up the planning section at SCFH when we have permission to do so – I made it clear that some of my ideas of how we could work at SCFH (the computer, plans on wall, appointment only) were mine alone and would be worked up depending on what was allowed.
. The three-year commencement requirement and that Planning are looking to confirm commencement where they can, but cannot change the legal requirement at this point – I mentioned the fact that three years was a long time and Mark Ogier [GP reporter] acknowledged that developers often sit on their land to the last minute.
. The possibility that the CCA could consider changing aspects of the legislation but that they should consult with the DPA first to identify precisely what the issue was, how it could be dealt with now and what changes, if any, were vital.
. That we were already proposing to submit a policy letter to amend the law on the provision of four copies to aid online applications and amend outline planning permission requirements to help Leale’s Yard, and would look to add anything that came out of the recovery plan debate.
. The background to the online service improvements and that we hoped to be at the forefront of the new service provision when this work begins again.
. That the DPA should be part of the recovery strategy, not just a consultee – this last point, I went through my speeches and the examples I gave then.
I have to say that we have received compliments which specifically refute the contents of your article, so at least there is some small mercy to the efforts made by the staff.
DEPUTY DAWN TINDALL
President, Development
& Planning Authority.