Never mind the quality, feel the width

Never mind the quality, feel the width

By Richard Schofield , Head of Planning Inspector Profession

Richard Schofield asks the question 'what is a “quality” decision?' and invites feedback on how we should define our approach.

I am not old enough to have watched the 1970s sitcom , the title of which I have pinched for this post. It is, however, remarkably apposite.

At the Planning Inspectorate, quality assurance is integral to our work. Local Plan and National Infrastructure reports are peer reviewed. A random selection of inspectors’ decisions are reviewed after and, sometimes, before issue.

For a long time we relied upon the number of complaints that we upheld, and the number of High Court Challenges that we lost, or where we submitted to judgement (very few, for the record), as a barometer of the quality of our output. Now, however, one of our Ministerial measures, against which we report, is the number of cases we have quality assured.

But, so what?

Well, our processes allow us to identify and to investigate, among other things, trends in appeal types; areas where additional training and/or guidance may be required; and areas where we need to help our customers to do things better (more on that another time).

But what IS a “quality” decision? What we regard as such may not be what you regard as one.?And I am keen to (re)define our approach in this area.

So, let’s hear your thoughts!

What factors go into making something that inspectors and all interested parties would regard as being of high quality? Feel free to reply to this.

And, yes, we know our written reps decision times are slower than they should be. And we’re working on it. This is about something else. By way of a clue, the answer is definitely NOT, “a case that is determined in my favour”.

Ian Kemp

Programme Officer (Post 2014 Experience)

2 年

A long since retired Planning Inspector once said to me… ‘There’s no such thing as a correct (quality) planning decision, simply decisions that are correctly arrived at.’ It’s always stuck in my mind.?

Clive Bentley

Acoustic Consultant and Partner at Sharps Acoustics LLP

2 年

I have been giving noise evidence in relation to appeals for both local authorities and developers for a couple of decades now and have noticed that, in the last few years, inspectors appear to give far less weight to expert evidence and rely more on their own judgement when considering noise. Probably the worst example of this occurred recently when, after much behind the scenes work, both sides agreed that noise could be resolved and that there would be no adverse effect and the inspector carried out a site visit and concluded something different based on a misunderstanding of situation. Noise was the central issue at that appeal so it was dismissed. An infuriating situation. Many others I have spoken to have experienced the same trend and it seems to come down to some, perhaps less experienced, inspectors seeming to “not trust the science”. I guess it’s a matter of training. I realise that noise is a narrow issue but it can be the key factor at times.

Robert Purton MRTPI ????

Partner at DLA / Husband / Dad / Carer

2 年

I would say that the majority of decisions made by PINs are already of a high quality. To minimise further issues arising - in our increasingly litigious working environment - a 'quality' appeal decision needs to probably consider a number of KPIs: 1) the decision needs to be legally robust as possible to end the increasing merry go round of challenging appeal decisions. So it needs to be correct and appear fair; 2) the decision needs to comprehensively and convincingly address national and local policies plus points made by both parties at the appeal - no matter how spurious they are; 3) - undue delays need to be avoided as far as possible so all parties know and understand the programme from submission to a legally robust decision.

Neil Holdsworth

Chartered Town Planner (MRTPI)

2 年

I would say that a 'quality' appeal decision deals comprehensively and convincingly - but also sympathetically - with the losing party arguments. One of the frustrations is that an Inspector could write an outstanding decision in this respect but it could still be legally flawed on a technicality, but on the other hand an Inspector could write an unconvincing decision that is still legally sound because, as far as I know, as long as the reasons are adequate, there is no legal requirement that it needs to be convincing.

回复
Tony Lawson

Owner, Concise Construction Ltd

2 年

I’m old enough to remember the show, and who could forget Fred Emney? I also appear to be the “Exception that proves the rule”. I am unfortunate enough to have been left waiting seven months now for a Hearing Date, having slipped through the Rosewell net , and had a PINS decision, which was in my favour “overturned” when the Government decided not to defend a JR called by Waverley Borough Council . For my part then, a good decision is one where it is made expeditiously and the content is reviewed so that any “less that eloquent language” does not lead to it being challenged . Tony Lawson

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Planning Inspectorate的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了