Ports NPS Inquiry Written Submission

Document Sample
Ports NPS Inquiry Written Submission Powered By Docstoc
					                                          Town and Country Planning Association
                                                      17 Carlton House Terrace
                                                           London, SW1Y 5AS
                                                                 020 7930 8903

David G Davies, Committee Specialist
Transport Committee
House of Commons
7 Millbank

14th January 2010

Dear Mr Davies,

TCPA Final Submission to the Transport Committee’s Inquiry on the Ports
National Policy Statement

The Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) would like to thank the
Committee for the invitation to contribute to this inquiry. Please find enclosed our
final written evidence and supporting documentation.

Yours sincerely,

Kate Henderson
Head of Strategy
Transport Committee Inquiry into the Ports National
Policy Statement
A TCPA Submission
14th January 2010

1.    About the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA)
1.1   Founded in 1899 the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) is the
      UK‟s oldest independent charity focused on planning and sustainable
      development. Through our work over the last century we have improved both
      the art and science of planning in the UK and abroad. The TCPA puts social
      justice and the environment at the heart of policy debate and seeks to inspire
      Government, industry and campaigners to take a fresh perspective on major
      issues, including planning policy, housing, regeneration and climate change.
      Our objectives are to:
       Secure a decent, well designed home for everyone, in a human-scale
          environment combining the best features of town and country;
       Empower people and communities to influence decisions that affect them;
       Improve the planning system in accordance with the principles of
          sustainable development.

2.    Background to the Inquiry
2.1   The Transport Committee (hereafter referred to as the Committee) has
      launched an inquiry into the proposal for a National Policy Statement on Ports
      (hereafter referred to as the draft Ports NPS), published by the Department for
      Transport on Monday 9 November 2009. The draft Ports NPS sets out a new
      policy and decision-making framework for port development in England and
      Wales. The TCPA presented oral evidence to the Committee on the 13th
      January 2010.

2.2   The Committee's inquiry will focus on the following four main areas:
       Responses to the questions in the Department's consultation;
       Whether the general planning principles set out in the draft Ports NPS form
         a coherent, appropriate, proportionate and practical framework within which
         the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) can asses future port
         planning applications;
       Are the sustainability and environmental criteria outlined in the draft Ports
         NPS appropriate, proportionate and practical, and
       Have issues or principles which should have been included in the draft
         Ports NPS been left out.

3.    Summary of TCPA Submission
3.1   The TCPA welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this timely inquiry by the
      Committee into the draft Ports NPS. This submission provides evidence in
      response to specific areas of interest outlined in the Committee‟s Call for
      Evidence, including the consultation questions.

3.2   The Committee should note that the essence of the TCPA‟s submission is
      based on the extent to which the implementation of the NPS, as a policy
      document and a decision-making framework for the Infrastructure Planning

          Commission (IPC), and as a material policy document in spatial development
          plans for planning authorities, will ultimately help achieve a sustainable future
          pattern of development and economic growth in England and ensure
          good connectivity, as part of a wider spatial planning framework. The
          TCPA is committed to the need for a national spatial framework so long as it
          delivers sustainable development and in particular prioritises action on social
          justice and climate change.

3.3       The TCPA presents our submission in two distinctive parts:

      a. On Process
       Status of the NPS and its systematic testing: The TCPA believes that the
         process of preparing this NPS and the other draft NPSs currently out for
         consultation (the draft Energy NPS suite) is inadequate and fails to provide
         sufficient scrutiny given the powerful nature of the NPS as essentially a
         development plan document under the Town and Country Planning system.
       Proper and transparent public involvement: The NPS process of running the
         public consultation and the parliamentary scrutiny in parallel does not allow
         sufficient time for effective public involvement. It is also unclear whether there is
         a clear communications and public engagement strategy.

      b. On Contents
       National development framework for Connecting England: The TCPA calls
         for the Ports NPS to be informed by, and link to, improvements in inland
         transport infrastructure (road and rail) that will unlock capacity and bring
         benefits to local economies. This can be achieved by establishing a
         development framework for England to ensure integrated and sustainable
       Co-ordinated approach to regional-local policy and delivery: The TCPA
         emphasises the need for potential applications for port developments to be
         „region-proof‟ by assessing them against alignment or „fit‟ with regional and local
         transport strategies. Together with potential applications for other types of
         forthcoming nationally-significant transport projects, this would ensure that a
         coherent and much needed co-ordinated approach is taken to transport
         infrastructure planning.
       Carbon accounting: The TCPA emphasises that for transport NPSs, overall,
         priority assessment must be given to climate change mitigation in line with the
         UK‟s international and EU obligations for emissions with the prescription of
         guidance in the development of ports. This would ensure that the UK‟s carbon
         budget is not exceeded and justified along purely economic grounds.
       Other matters: The TCPA believes that for the NPS to be truly effective and
         coherently spatial, and to avoid unnecessary delays in implementation, it must
         be aligned with existing planning policies and dove-tail with the plan-led system.
         The TCPA supports the role of good design in delivering wider social, economic
         and environmental objectives, and recommends explicit references to DfT‟s own
         ports masterplan guidance.

3.4      In light of issues raised above, the TCPA shares the Government‟s vision and
         plans for a more transparent, efficient and accessible planning system, and
         accepts the principle of national policy statements.

4.        Main TCPA Submission

          On Process
4.1   The Status of NPS
4.1.1 The status and role of the NPS is clear and explicitly set out in Section 104(3) of
      the Planning Act 2008. The IPC “must decide the application in accordance
      with any relevant national policy statement”. The Act does provide for
      exceptions which are tightly defined, but includes the circumstances where
      impacts might outweigh benefits (Section 104 (7)).

4.1.2 The weight to be given to NPS in decision making appears to be more forceful
      than that given to existing development plans under the Town and Country
      Planning regime. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 reinforced
      the plan-led system with decisions being made in accordance with the plan 1.
      However, the exception to this provision is much more broadly drawn including
      any material considerations which may include other policies issued by the
      Secretary of State, i.e. the NPS. The point is that the NPS have the legal status
      of a kind of „super development plan‟ which appears to provide much more
      limited discretion for the decision-maker than any other form of planning.

4.1.3 The TCPA notes that the draft NPS can be relevant and material to decisions in
      the rest of the Town and Country Planning system. This is reflected in CLG‟s
      letter on the NPSs to all Chief Planning Officers on the 9 th November 20092. In
      this letter, it is made clear that Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) and
      responsible regional authorities should consider the extent to which emerging
      plans and strategies can reasonably have regard to emerging NPSs, depending
      on the stage which the development plan has reached. NPSs are also likely to
      be material consideration in areas where development plans are out of date.
      Where there are conflicts with local or regional plans, the designated NPSs will
      prevail (Annex A Paragraph 18).

4.1.4 The TCPA‟s concern is that NPS have a specific legislative purpose for the
      decision-making and consent-granting responsibility of the IPC. They are
      primarily designed to guide the decisions of that body. As a consequence, while
      the TCPA welcomes limited degree of clarification from CLG‟s letter, their legal
      status in the rest of the planning system is uncertain and will have to be
      resolved in the courts. Providing policy that is vital for Town and Country
      Planning in the NPS documents will result in uncertainty and delay and is an
      unnecessary complication of an already procedurally complex system.

4.2   The systematic testing of NPS
4.2.1 The TCPA believes in the proper scrutiny of planning policies proportionate to
      their influence over final outcomes. The NPS holds a powerful status in
      planning which implies that the testing and examination of NPS should at least
      meet the standards of lower tier local and regional planning documents. This is
      even more important given that the IPC cannot reopen policy issues settled in
      NPS (Section 106 (b) 2008 Planning Act) and because the IPC is not
      democratically accountable for its individual decisions.

4.2.2 As well as formal arrangements for public participation, other planning
      documents have a systematic and transparent framework for the examination of
      development plan documents and their supporting evidence. This is known as

    Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
    CLG, November 2009, Dear Chief Planning Officer Letter on National Policy Statements

       the „soundness test‟. Guidance for the testing of soundness in examinations in
       public for both Regional Spatial Strategies 3 and Local Development Framework
       Development Plan Documents 4 are provided by the Department for
       Communities and Local Government (CLG) and by the Planning Inspectorate to
       ensure that participants understand how the test is applied. The test is vital to
       ensure that plans are fit for purpose. This means that differing plans have to
       conform to minimum standards of justification and effectiveness (including
       proper evidence gathering and community participation as well as

4.2.3 The TCPA believes that a clear assessment framework is a vital pre-requisite
      for public confidence as well as ensuring consistency of approach and
      assessments of the different NPSs.

4.2.4 This concern is reinforced by the fact the different select committees from
      different Government departments will be examining differing NPSs. The TCPA
      is not aware of any comprehensive or systematic guidance provided to the
      select committees on assessing the soundness of NPSs. Crucially the whole
      weight of this necessary function falls on the relevant parliamentary select
      committees. We remain concerned that such select committees will not have
      the time, resources and expertise to provide sufficiently stringent scrutiny of a
      „development plan document‟. For example, a Local Development Framework
      (LDF) examination might last between 4 and 6 weeks and in session most
      working days.

4.3   Proper and transparent public involvement
4.3.1 The TCPA believes that the comparison between the level of statutory public
      engagement in regional and local planning and the NPS preparation is stark.
      First and foremost, the Planning Act 2008 gives wide discretion to the relevant
      Secretary of State as to how to proceed with public consultation on NPS but
      without a requirement to produce a statement setting out the details equivalent
      to one required for regional and local planning bodies.

4.3.2 The planning system requires a minimum level of public consultation and
      involvement in the preparation of spatial plans, strategy and policy documents.
      LPAs must prepare a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) which sets
      out how people will be involved and prioritises public engagement. This is a
      requirement also extended to Regional Planning Bodies. In addition there are
      two defined periods of public participation in plan preparation (PPS 12)5 and a
      statutory right to be heard for any participant who makes representations in a
      independent examination (Section 20 (6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase
      Act 2004). This provision safe guards the system from potential Human Rights
      Act (HRA) challenges under Article 6 (right to fair hearing) 6 . This potential
      engagement of the HRA is related to the Local Development Framework‟s
      (LDF) allocation of site specific development proposals. We note however that
      the NPS is not a site specific document but that it is still considered a
      development plan.
4.3.3 Table 1 below provides a comparison of public involvement and engagement
      requirements between the NPS and other spatial planning documents. It is

  CLG, September 2004, Planning Policy Statement 11: Regional Spatial Strategies, Paragraph
2.49, Page 42
  CLG, June 2008, Planning Policy Statement 12: Local Spatial Planning, Paragraphs 4.51 and
4.52, Page 19 and 20
  CLG, 2009, Planning Policy Statement 12: Local Spatial Planning
  Human Rights Act 1998

                         significant that there is no examination in public of NPS. Instead the full weight
                         of independent testing of the NPS falls on the parliamentary process.

Table 1. Comparison of public involvement and engagement requirements of different spatial

                           National Policy           Regional Spatial                                      Development Plan
                                                                                 Regional Strategy
                             Statement                  Strategy                                            Document (LDF)
                      Process governed by the      Preparation process         Preparation process to     Preparation process
                      Infrastructure Planning      governed by the Town        be governed by the         governed by the Town
                      (National Policy             and Country Planning        Town and Country           and Country Planning
                      Statement Consultation)      (Regional Planning)         Planning (Regional         (Local Development)
                      Regulations 2009             (England) Regulations       Strategy) (England)        (England) Regulations
                                                   2004                        Regulations 2010 in        2004
                                                                               Spring 2010

                                                   Planning and                Local Democracy,           Planning and
Pre Plan Production

                      NA                           Compulsory Purchase         Economic Development       Compulsory Purchase
                                                   Act 2004                    and Construction Act       Act 2004

                                                   Section 6: Regional         Section 75: Responsible    Section 18: Local
                                                   planning body to publish    Regional Authority to      Planning Authority to
                                                   and keep under review a     publish and keep under     publish and keep under
                                                   statement of policies for   review a statement of      review a statement of
                                                   involvement                 policies for involvement   community involvement

                      Planning Act 2008            Planning Policy             Policy Statement on        Planning Policy
                                                   Statement 11: Regional      Regional Strategies and    Statement 12: Local
                                                   Spatial Strategies, 2004    Guidance on the            Spatial Planning, 2008
Draft Submission

                                                                               establishment of
                                                                               Leaders' Boards:
                                                                               Consultation, 2009
                      Section 5(4): NPS to be
                      consulted on                 Annex D: Guidance on        Section 5: Proposed        Paras 4.19-4.29:
                                                   community involvement       guidance on revising       Guidance on
                      Section 7: Secretary of      in preparing RSSs           regional strategies with   participation in preparing
                      State‟s duty for                                         stakeholder and public     Core Strategies
                      consultation and publicity                               engagement

                      Planning Act 2008            Planning and                Local Democracy,           Planning and
                                                   Compulsory Purchase         Economic Development       Compulsory Purchase

                                                   Act 2004                    and Construction Act       Act 2004

                      Section 9: Parliamentary     Section 8: Examination      Section 76: Examination    Section 20: Examination
                      scrutiny requirements        in public                   in public                  in public including a right
                                                                                                          to be heard.

4.3.4 Finally, the TCPA is concerned about the overlap between the public
      consultation process and the Transport Committee‟s deliberation, and that this
      may limit the Committee‟s ability to fully consider the results of the public
      consultation and is likely to confuse members of the public wishing to submit
      evidence to the Committee.

       On Contents
4.4   A national development framework for Connecting England
4.4.1 A key recommendation from the TCPA‟s 2006 Connecting England report7 was
      that a national framework for infrastructure development and investment was
      vital in order to create a coherent and efficient transport network. The TCPA
      also highlights the recommendations from this report for a balanced ports
      strategy which ensures the sustainable growth of English ports by determining
      growth limits in southern ports, and encouraging growth in northern ports 8. The
      TCPA accepts this NPS specifically deals with the Government‟s policy for new
      port development, but that our comments should be considered in the context of
      an integrated and connected England.

4.4.2 The TCPA notes that the NPS re-states the market-led policy of the Interim
      Report for the Ports Policy Review in July 2007. The Executive Summary of this
      Interim Report states the confirmation of Government‟s view that “commercial
      port operators are best-placed to make decisions about where and when to
      invest in the port sector”9.

4.4.3 The TCPA does not discount the important role of the market to provide the
      level of investment required to initiate, develop and manage port operations.
      However advocating a market-led approach to planning for ports in the context
      of national benefit and need raises significant concerns for long term
      sustainability. The TCPA notes that both the draft Ports NPS and the
      Government‟s Delivering a Sustainable Transport System (DaSTS) highlight the
      uncertainty in projecting future demand. It is likely that the market will view this
      as a barrier to investment and reaping profitable returns. The implication for the
      draft Ports NPS is that there will be a need to plan, in spatial terms, for
      uncertainty by presenting a certain spatial vision and development framework.
      The TCPA highlights the Transport Committee‟s own conclusions on this issue
      in its final report on the ports industry in England and Wales in 200710.

4.4.4 Delivering a Sustainable Transport System (DaSTS) published in 2008, is
      considered as the Government‟s national framework for transport. In DaSTS the
      Government recognises its responsibility to set a national policy and investment
      framework set upon long term goals and priorities. In particular it is recognised
      that the different components of the transport infrastructure, including ports,
      “collectively, are critical to the functioning of the system as a whole”11. As part of
      this, the illustration of the strategic national corridors of the transport system
      includes ports. The TCPA notes that there is no ports strategy for England and
      does not believe that the DaSTS is, and can be, a substitute. However aligning
      the Ports NPS spatially with this DaSTS „national framework‟ (in the absence of
      a national development framework for all infrastructure and spatial
      development) will be sensible and greatly assist the IPC in making coherent
      decisions on port development which looks beyond the short-term.

4.4.5 For nationally-significant port schemes, it is important to make a determination
      based on an assessment of how the proposed scheme impacts, positively and

  TCPA, Connecting England: A Framework for Regional Development was the final report of a
TCPA-appointed Commission chaired by Peter Hetherington.
  TCPA, Connecting England: A Framework for Regional Development, Section 4.5, pp.37-38.
  DfT, 2007, Ports Policy Review Interim Report, Executive Summary
   Transport Committee, January 2007, The Ports Industry in England and Wales. Second
Report of Session 2006-07, Section 9
   DfT, 2008, Delivering a Sustainable Transport System: Main Report, Chapter 4: National
Framework, Paragraph 4.10, pp. 30

       adversely, on the wider strategic considerations. To determine a scheme with
       national benefit it is also important to assess wider strategic considerations;
       these must be adequately addressed in order to make a proposed scheme
       viable and sustainable in a preferred location. All this points to a need for a
       plan-led approach, of which the NPS is intrinsically a part of, and indeed as the
       top tier policy and plan document. As part of this and the development plan
       document role of the NPS, it would require making judgements on potential
       suitable „spatial‟ locations for new ports or significant improvements to existing
       ports in the context of wider strategic priorities highlighted in TCPA comments.
       Again this would greatly assist the IPC in making sustainable long term
       decisions in the national interest.

4.4.6 Finally, the TCPA concludes this section by highlighting „interim‟
      recommendations and conclusions in relation to ports from an emerging study
      undertaken by Sir Peter Hall and Peter Hetherington for the TCPA and Local
      Government Association. Connecting Local Economies 12 recommends that:
     The National Policy Statement for Ports should take a strategic approach rather
      than leave the determination of port expansion policy to be led exclusively by
      the currently dominant providers in the present market. This should be informed
      by and link to improvements in inland transport infrastructure (road and rail) that
      will unlock capacity and bring benefits to local economies.
     Rail and road pressures from freight traffic for all of the largest ports should be
      assessed and a programme of „rail gauge enhancement‟ undertaken where
      appropriate to take more freight off the road, reduce congestion and to make
      ports in less congested regions more attractive destinations for container traffic
      and promote economic development in other English regions.

4.5   Co-ordinated approach to assessing need within the wider regional-local
      policy and delivery frameworks
4.5.1 There are a number of issues in relation to whether the draft Ports NPS is
      properly co-ordinated with wider strategic and local policy and investment
      frameworks, and whether the draft Ports NPS will enable the IPC - through the
      consents process – to make appropriate determinations based on thorough
      assessments of local impacts and benefits.

4.5.2 Firstly, unlike the portfolio of draft Energy NPSs - which at least provides the
      opportunity for the public and key stakeholders to make a collective judgement
      on the merits and shortfalls of the policy documents - the draft Ports NPS is
      being consulted on in absence of the intended NPSs on National Networks and
      Airports (however, please note that the TCPA expresses similar concerns for
      process and content in the draft Energy NPS suite). In particular, the TCPA is
      concerned that without the publication of the NPSs on National Networks and
      Airports consultees will not be able to make proper assessments and
      judgements about the spatial implications for a sustainable framework of
      development, at least for inter and intra-regional transport and freight. This is a
      pertinent point in the context of considering existing capacity and potential
      improvement opportunities of multi-modal networks to accommodate freight
      traffic and availability of inter-modal freight terminals, particularly to and within
      the northern regions. The TCPA highlights the DfT‟s interim Ports Policy Review
      report which accepted that “a crucial aspect of port policy is inland connections

  Connecting Local Economies – the Transport Implications takes forward TCPA‟s Connecting
England report (May 2006) and the LGA‟s Prosperous Communities II: vive la devolution! report
(Feb 2007). This report will be submitted to the Committee once published in early 2010.

        to ports”, and transferable lessons from mainland European countries which are
        investing more systematically in new rail freight links.

4.5.3 Secondly, while the TCPA does not discount the important contribution of ports
      to the economy, the Association is not convinced that the draft Ports NPS
      clearly sets out the long-term need, provision and likely market changes for port
      infrastructure based on robust and independent evidence, particularly in
      assessing the suitability of locations. The draft Ports NPS‟s own admission that
      “…the total need for port infrastructure is a consequence of overall demand for
      port capacity together with the need to retain the flexibility that ensures that port
      capacity is located where it is required, including in response to any changes in
      inland distribution networks and ship call patterns that may occur; and the need
      to ensure effective competition and resilience in port operations”13.

4.5.4 This is a particularly significant issue as the draft Ports NPS, when approved by
      the Secretary of State, will become a framework for IPC decision-making, which
      in planning terms, makes the NPS essentially a development plan document.
      And that the IPC will be required to not assess need. Section 1.12.1 of the draft
      Ports NPS states that “…when determining an application for an order granting
      development consent in relation to ports, the decision-maker should accept the
      need for future capacity”14. The TCPA emphasises the basis of decision-making
      under the planning system which is to use robust evidence to plan positively,
      and therefore it is an imperative that the needs assessment in the draft Ports
      NPS is tested and scrutinised more thoroughly, comparable to the process
      required in adopting a development plan document (please see Section 4.2 of
      this submission).

4.5.5 Thirdly, the draft Ports NPS does not make considering regional and local
      transport and other spatial priorities an assessment criteria. The TCPA re-
      asserts the principle of "region proofing" and, as part of this process, suggests
      that port capacity/ additional capacity may/ should be aligned with region's
      proportion of national GDP/GDP growth. And that an additional allowance
      should be made to recognise the fact that many northern port locations have
      less congested land connections than ports in the south do. The Connecting
      England Commission recommended “region-proofing” decisions which “…in
      effect would not be to direct investment to inappropriate places but rather to
      ensure that central and local government (and regional bodies) were able to
      offer clear and co-ordinated support for agreed regional development outcomes,
      as opposed to region competing with region”15.

4.5.6 The TCPA questions how and to what extent the Ports NPS will address the
      spatial implications of ports development if the reliance of a market-led
      approach on need is accepted. What about the degree of coherency to existing
      RSSs (spatial diagrams), RESs (or the single integrated RSS), as well as the
      DaSTS‟s framework of national infrastructure? This issue again raises the need
      for “region-proofing”, with the first step involving the engagement of strategic
      partners, including regional planning bodies/ regional leaders‟ board who have
      responsibility for regional spatial, transport and economic development

   Draft Ports NPS, Section 1.11.1, pp.11
   Draft Ports NPS, Section 1.12.1, pp.15
   TCPA, May 2006, Connecting England, Section 4.1. Though region-proofing was an idea
raised under the skills, research and innovation section of this report, the TCPA believes that,
similar to the practical application of „Rural Proofing‟ can be applied as an underlying appraisal
process of plans, programmes and strategies, including that of the NPS.

4.5.7 Allied with the above, the TCPA is not able to identify in the draft Ports NPS
      whether determinations for significant port developments by the IPC will have
      regard or consider pressures on regional and local infrastructure needs as a
      result of the nationally significant development. In addition this will result in an
      uncertain decision-making framework for the IPC in mediating interests,
      balancing impacts, accounting for the social and economic implications at the
      local levels. The TCPA has been made aware of moves to reduce the transit
      process for inland freight from ports. This involves locating logistic facilities/
      assembly plants/ warehouses closer to the „port gate‟/ consumers to minimise
      emissions by eliminating stages from the transport logistics process. This will
      result in a higher concentration of ports-related activities and employment
      opportunities closer to the port itself. The spatial implications of this will be
      profound for local planning for infrastructure. This specifically relates to social
      infrastructure such as skills and education which will be needed to service the
      anticipated need for locally-skilled workers. There will also be an increased
      demand for transport, housing, utilities and community infrastructure

4.5.8 The development of a port should be consented if national, regional and local
      benefits outweigh local impacts - it must satisfy this balancing test. The TCPA
      believes that the draft Ports NPS in its current form does not allow the IPC
      appropriate flexibility to take into account valid regional and local interests. The
      TCPA believes that the Government must provide greater policy clarification
      and further guidance to the IPC on this issue.

4.6   Carbon accounting
4.6.1 The TCPA welcomes the reference to climate change within the Key
      Considerations; however we note that the assessment criteria for climate
      change mitigation and guidance for the IPC in any new port development
      clearly sets a presumption in favour of approving schemes if benefits
      significantly outweigh the reality of additional emissions. The TCPA notes that
      the draft Ports NPS does not require the applicant to take account of emissions
      from shipping. The TCPA also notes that the draft Ports NPS recognises the
      importance of good design in minimising emissions, but this only relates to the
      energy efficiency of buildings.

4.6.2 The TCPA believes that given the contribution of ports and related ports
      activities to carbon emissions the lack of prescription and guidance in Section
      2.13 of the draft Ports NPS is unlikely to provide the right framework to guide
      the decisions of the IPC. The TCPA has provided detailed evidence to the
      Energy and Climate Change Committee which deals with our grave concern
      that the NPSs fail to provide the IPC with a proper metric to consider carbon
      emissions16. The key conclusion of this evidence is that NPS must ensure that
      the IPC considers the full life cycle of emissions from proposed development.
      Such information is required by the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

4.6.3 The TCPA highlights a report published by the Environmental Audit Committee
      (EAC) on the 11th January 2010 on Carbon Budgets. In this report the EAC

   Please see TCPA Submission to the Energy & Climate Change Committee Inquiry on the
Draft Energy National Policy Statements, 11 January 2010, available at

       states that “The Government must put in place a mechanism to ensure that the
       sum of the decisions taken by the IPC are consistent with the carbon budgets
       and the milestones that the Committee on Climate Change has set out to
       ensure the infrastructure needed to meet future budget periods is put in place in
       the next few years” 17 . While accepting that the context to this quotation is
       targeted at the Energy and Climate Change Committee and the draft Energy
       NPSs, the TCPA believes the fundamental issue of carbon accountability within
       the IPC‟s decisions to the Committee on Climate Change‟s carbon budget
       remains a valid one and applicable across all NPSs, including the Ports.

4.7   Other matters
4.7.1 Consideration of existing planning policies: The DfT recognises the Ports
      NPS as part of the planning system rather than in parallel to it. It mentions the
      role of planning in delivering sustainable development. The TCPA is surprised
      and alarmed that there is no mention and explicit reference or attempt to align
      with the spatial planning process, including at least policy references to key
      planning policy statements affecting the sustainable development of ports,
      including PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS Supplement on
      climate change and PPG13 (Transport). Please note that PPG13 may need
      updating as it was adopted in 2001.

4.7.2 Similarly above, in Section 2: Guidance on Assessment - Key Considerations of
      the NPS, there is lack of consideration and integration to other planning
      policies. The TCPA are especially about the lack of recognition of the
      development plan-led system and the stakeholder roles of strategic and local
      planning authorities. Strategic ports policy should link the development of ports
      to the consideration of localised socio-economic and transport impacts of ports
      development. The TCPA emphasise the role and capability of the planning
      system to deliver developments in the most sustainable of places in an
      integrated way through proper environmental assessment.

4.7.3 Delivering on good design in port development: Reference to good design
      as a statutory consideration is outlined in Section 10 (3) of the Planning Act
      2008. However there is no policy guidance on how best to achieve, deliver or
      implement this. Of specific concern there is no reference to the DfT‟s own Ports
      Masterplan final guidance and „encouragement‟ for major ports to produce
      masterplans. Masterplans are the mechanism for ensuring integrated and
      sustainable development of ports, associated facilities and the wider spatial
      context, in particular mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The NPS
      must require all Ports applications to be accompanied by a masterplan, in
      collaboration with planning authorities and local communities.

  Environmental Audit Committee, 11 January 2010, Carbon Budgets. Third Report of Session
2009–10. Paragraphs 70 and 71

Reference Documents
Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG), January 2005, Planning
Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development

CLG, December 2007, Planning Policy Statement: Planning and Climate Change.
Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1

CLG. March 2001, Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport

Department for Transport (DfT), November 2008, Delivering a Sustainable Transport
System: Main Report

DfT, December 2008, Guidance on the preparation of port master plans

DfT, July 2007, Ports Policy Review Interim Report

Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR), Modern Ports.
Facing the Future Conference Report 20th February 2002. Prepared by Coastal
Management for Sustainability

Hall, P. and Hetherington, P., (Forthcoming), Connecting Local Economies – the
Transport Implications, draft version, TCPA and LGA. (To be submitted as supporting
evidence once published in early 2010)

House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, January 2010, Carbon Budget,
Third Report of Session 2009–10, TSO, London

House of Commons Transport Committee, January 2007, The Ports Industry in
England and Wales. Second Report of Session 2006-07, TSO, London

TCPA, May 2006, Connecting England. A Framework for Regional Development.
Final Report of the TCPA-Appointed Hetherington Commission on the Future
Development Needs and Priorities of England. (Submitted as supporting evidence)

TCPA, July 2005, Planning for Accessible and Sustainable Transport

TCPA, 11 January 2010, TCPA Submission to the Energy & Climate Change
Committee Inquiry on the Draft Energy National Policy Statements, available at

The Planning Inspectorate, August 2009, Local Development Frameworks.
Examining Development Plan Documents: Soundness Guidance (2nd Edition)