Section: Planning

Challenge to Government's Eco-strategy

Council leaders called on the Government to reconsider proposed eco-town developments where there is strong local authority opposition.

It was made after independent legal advice revealed that the Government's approach to building eco-towns could be subject to Judicial Review.

The Local Government Association (LGA) asked John Steel QC to refresh the opinion he gave in July 2008 on the eco-town proposals, in which he concluded that:

'the Government is bypassing local democracy and planning processes to impose the schemes on the public'.

Further legal opinion was sought following updated information published by the Government and the BARD campaign's failed attempt to seek a judicial review of the eco-towns policy.

John Steel QC concludes that the Government's plans remain 'unfair, illogical and unreasonable,' susceptible to judicial review and with a strong likelihood of being declared unlawful.

In his further legal opinion to the LGA, John Steel QC said:

"In short, my advice has not changed in relation to the material parts of the Opinion dated 2nd July 2008.
"Indeed it has been strengthened by the draft PPS and other recent Government statements and documents which put it beyond doubt that the clear intention of the Government is to promote eco-towns giving them a clear and distinct procedural advantage over other forms of development which would meet housing need, such as town expansion, even if such housing would meet the criteria set for eco-towns to an equal or even greater degree.
"They would not have to be considered through the RSS and Development Plan making system, but could be by planning application, even if they would be wholly premature to the Development Plan and prejudice decisions made as to the location and amount of housing to be provided in the area.
"The Government's policy is thinly disguised as a method seeking to avoid the statutory plan-making system due to its inherent requirements, including for public consultation and consequential delays.
"The proposed policy contained in the draft PPS is unfair, illogical and unreasonable. It is susceptible to judicial review with a strong likelihood of being declared unlawful."

Giving opinion on the BARD campaign's failed attempt to seek a judicial review of the Government's eco towns policy, John Steel QC said:

"Except in passing and in the context of adequacy of consultation, the Court did not consider the alternative forms by which housing could be delivered and yet comply with the Government's Eco-Towns stated policy objectives. These matters were referred to in my earlier Opinion dated 26th January 2009.

"In particular, the Court did not consider such issues of principle or reach any conclusion on the apparent conflict between Eco-Towns claimed 'more challenging' exemplar sustainability policy (under EPPS) and expansion of existing towns by planned urban extensions of their urban areas (under PPS3), nor questions as to how Eco-Towns would count towards housing need and land supply.

"Other questions raised in my Opinion dated 27th January 2009 and my earlier Joint Opinion dated 2nd July 2008 remain too, subject to considerations.

"These significant and important matters of principal are yet to be determined by a Court. They remain material issues concerning Eco-Town policy as a result of publication of the draft PPS. In the event that no answer is given to such matters in the definitive PPS when published, there remains a strong case for judicial review."

Section: Planning

Challenge to Government's Eco-strategy

Legal Update

Reporting on Feb-Apr 2009

Quick Links

Welcome to the Legal Update

Archive Issues Reporting Periods