VZCZCXRO9831
RR RUEHAG RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSR
DE RUEHLO #2492/01 3091212
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 051212Z NOV 09
FM AMEMBASSY LONDON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3889
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 LONDON 002492 
 
NOFORN 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/21/2019 
TAGS: ECON ENRG UK
SUBJECT: CONSERVATIVE PARTY PLANS TO ABOLISH THE UK 
INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING COMMISSION 
 
REF: LONDON 1514 
 
Classified By: Economic Minister Counselor Richard Albright for reasons  1.4 (b) and (d)  1. (C/NF)  Summary.  The Conservative Party is planning to abolish the UK Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) if they win the national election due by June 2010.  The 2008 Planning Law -- established the IPC -- with the intent of reducing costs, increasing transparency, and eliminating long wait times in the planning application process.  The Conservative Party argues ministers should make the power to make planning decisions, not the IPC.  Businesses, however, fear the Conservative's proposal will cause long delays by ministers slow to reach planning decisions.  End summary.  

UK PLANNING ACT SEEKS TO SPEED THINGS UP ----------------------------------------  

¶2. (SBU) The case for radical change in the UK planning process is not new.  Prior to the passage of the 2008 Planning Act, planning decisions were made by local government councils, applied on an ad-hoc basis, and frequently driven by politics.  Some large controversial infrastructure projects were ultimately referred to Parliament.  UK airport operator BAA Ltd.'s application to build Heathrow Terminal 5 was one of the longest in UK history.  BAA submitted its planning application in February 1993 and long delays in the public inquiry process and multiple reviews at various levels of government, including Parliament, resulted in the construction being delayed until mid-2002.  The terminal finally opened in March 2008 -- fifteen years from the date the application was first submitted.  While planning applications are usually submitted by large UK or European businesses, the Heathrow project included a few U.S. supply chain companies.  British Energy had to wait six years for the go-ahead to build the Sizewell B nuclear power station, which became operational in 1995. Other examples of large infrastructure projects incurring delays in the past include upgrades to electricity grids, cross-rail linkages, and hazardous waste incinerators.  

¶3. (SBU) The Planning Act was approved by the UK Parliament in November 2008.  This legislation reforms the UK planning process by removing planning decisions for large infrastructure projects from local authorities and creating a national UK Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC).  The goal of the IPC is to reduce review times for "nationally significant" infrastructure projects, increase transparency, and ensure that stakeholder input is received up front.  The IPC is scheduled to become fully operational by March 1, 2010; it started providing pre-application planning advice on October 1, 2009.  

IPC TO BASE DECISIONS ON NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENTS --------------------------------------------- ------  

¶4. (SBU) The Planning Law calls for the IPC's decisions on planning applications to be guided by twelve National Policy Statements (NPSs).  The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is preparing six of these NPSs -- Overall Energy Policy; Renewables; Fossil Fuels; Electricity Networks; Oil and Gas; and Nuclear Energy.  The Department of Transport (DfT) is responsible for putting together three NPSs on the ports, transportation networks, and airports. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is responsible for three NPSs on the UK's water supply, dealing with waste water, and hazardous waste.  

¶5. (SBU) All twelve NPSs will receive public comment and scrutiny by Parliament.  DECC's Director of Planning and Consents Richard Mellish recently told ESTHOff a special parliamentary committee may be established to review all of the NPSs in addition to the respective committees which monitor the work of DECC, DfT, and DEFRA.  Farrah Bhatti, a staffer on the House of Commons Climate Change Committee, told ESTHOff it will take four to five weeks for the committee to review each NPS from DECC.  Bhatti added there will be an "option" for the House of Commons to vote on each NPS, but Mellish told ESTHOff any vote would be "non-binding."  Bhatti, Mellish, and an MP indicated it remained unclear whether the House of Lords would review the NPSs.  

IPC EXPECTED TO SPEED UP PROCESS, RAISE ETHICAL STANDARDS --------------------------------------------- ------------  

¶6.  (SBU) HMG expects the IPC to improve ethics on planning applications, since commissioners are required to be  LONDON 00002492  002 OF 003   "politically independent" and financially unconnected to any project under consideration.  Most importantly, HMG expects the IPC to reduce the processing times for major applications from 100 weeks (two years) down to 35 weeks (nine months). According to a presentation in July 2009 by Chair of the IPC Sir Michael Pitt and information on IPC's website, the planning reforms are also expected to cut overall costs of delivering national infrastructure by 300 million GBP ($500 million) annually.  Decisions of IPC commissioners can be taken to court.  Planning applications are required to include environmental assessments, site surveys, and other background.  

¶7. (SBU) The IPC, once operational on March 1, 2010, will review planning applications and provide the requested decision for large infrastructure projects.  The IPC opened its doors on October 1 and is providing pre-application advice and guidance to utilities and developers.  The IPC released a list of eleven projects on October 22 in the renewable, nuclear, and electricity sector that it initially plans to review.  

PERSONNEL BEING GATHERED TO RUN THE IPC ---------------------------------------  

¶8.  (SBU) The IPC's headquarters is located in Bristol and its leadership is already in place.  The budget for the IPC for 2009/2010 is 10 million GBP ($16 million).  Sir Michael Pitt serves as the Chair, with two deputies, Robert Upton and Dr. Pauleen Lane.  Parliament reviewed and approved the appointment of Sir Michael Pitt in March 2009 and the two deputies in July 2009.  Three commissioners are also in place, but this number is expected to rise to 30-35 once the IPC becomes fully operational.  Approximately thirty staff are already on board, and this number is expected to grow as the workload increases.  The IPC Board also includes a Chief Executive Officer, four directors, and two non-executive directors.  

SUPPORT -- AND SKEPTICISM -- FROM STAKEHOLDERS --------------------------------------------- -  

¶9. (SBU) John Cridland, Deputy Director General of the Confederation of Business Industries (CBI), stated on July 20 that the 2008 Planning Act has strong support from business. World Wildlife Fund-UK (WWF) Director David Norman said the law brings transparency "essential" to the planning process, although other environmental NGOs have been more guarded.  UK Local Government Association staffer Philip Mind said UK local government authorities are supportive of reform, since the law requires businesses/utilities to consult with stakeholders and local communities early in the planning application process.  

¶10. (C/NF) Despite the general support for planning reforms, HMG's delay in publishing the NPSs is disconcerting to some. Labour MP Jamie Reed told ESTHOff he predicts the timeline in publishing the NPSs may slip past December 2009.  If this happens, he said, the 2010 elections will dominate the agenda and the NPSs will not receive the proper scrutiny. Westinghouse and Fluor officials also expressed similar concerns to ESTHOff.  David Powell, Regional Vice President for Westinghouse, told ESTHOff he suspects DECC is being very careful before publishing the NPS on Nuclear Energy because it is trying to ensure the NPS will be "air-tight" against legal challenge.  CBI published a report on the UK's "nuclear renaissance" on October 22 and urged HMG to publish the NPS on Nuclear Energy "as quickly as possible."  

CONSERVATIVE PARTY'S PLAN TO SCRAP THE IPC ------------------------------------------  

¶11. (SBU/NF) While the Conservative Party's opposition to the IPC is well-known among stakeholders and politicians, the party passed a policy paper to "The Independent" newspaper the week of October 22 to publicize these views. The Conservative Party reiterated its plans to abolish the IPC and to give planning decision-making power to ministers. Conservative Shadow Minister of Energy Charles Hendry argued that the IPC would not give the public sufficient opportunity to express views and that decisions would become "tied up" in legal challenges.  Conservative Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Caroline Spelman also criticized the IPC in a press statement in early October, calling it a "quango" or independent quasi non-government organization (NGO) unaccountable to the government and public. Under a Conservative government, Spelman said, National Policy Statements would remain but each would require ratification by both Houses of Parliament.  LONDON 00002492  003 OF 003   Conservative MP Bob Neill, Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party and Shadow Local Government and Planning Minister, echoed many of these same sentiments at a CBI conference in July, but added his plans for creating a special "planning division" within the Department of Communities and Development.  

¶12. (C/NF) Labour MP Jamie Reed, who sat on the House of Commons Planning Committee temporarily formed to evaluate the 2008 Planning Law, told ESTHOff on October 14 the Conservatives are "playing hardball" in their efforts to abolish the IPC.  House of Commons Climate Change Committee staffer Farrah Bhatti told ESTHOff the Liberal Democrats also oppose the IPC.  Some business leaders fear that Conservative plans to abolish the IPC will result in long delays as ministers drag out their decisions.  David Powell, Regional Vice President for Westinghouse, told ESTHOff that this uncertainty will cause more frustration for utilities investing billions in the UK with tightly-scheduled plans for nuclear new build.  French-owned EDF Energy stated in the media in March 2009 it would not "tolerate" significant planning delays.  Planning delays could also have a "trickle-down" effect on U.S. companies like Westinghouse, which is pursuing bids with utilities to provide its AP1000 nuclear reactor.  A few other U.S. companies active in the UK nuclear new build market include Fluor and CH2MHill.  Some industry and government officials speculated to ESTHOff the Conservative Party may "stick" with the planning legislation, but look to the implementing regulations to make changes if they win the next election.  

COMMENT -------  

¶13. (C/NF) If the Conservative Party wins the next election and carries through with its promise to eliminate the IPC, some businesses, including some major U.S. companies, are expressing concern this could cause more uncertainty in the planning process.  Business investment has already slowed as a result of the recession.  The Conservatives have taken aim in recent years at "quangos" (quasi-NGOs) created by HMG and are generally opposed to them.  The Conservatives consider the IPC another "quango," which is unaccountable to the public and costing taxpayers money.  However, removing planning power from an independent body and giving it to ministers may politicize the process, adding time and uncertainty and recreate some of the politicization and delay that the planning law was intended to overcome.  Whatever planning system HMG ends up with in the long-term, investors are keen that it speeds up the planning process and provides transparency in its planning decisions. The UK's global competitiveness will depend on it.  Visit London's Classified Website: XXXXXXXXXXXX
Susman