Last year, the Government launched the “Planning for the Future” consultation which proposed the most significant reforms to the planning system in England for a generation. The document proposed a move to a ‘zoning’ system, the abolition of local plans and potentially fewer opportunities for local engagement on planning, something the Institute highlighted in our response to the consultation.

The Cabinet reshuffle last week replaced the former Secretary of State Robert Jenrick with Michael Gove, who has rebranded his department from the “Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government” to the “Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities”. It had been anticipated that the new minister would scale back the proposed reforms, due to strong opposition on the Conservative backbenches (bolstered by the surprise result in the Chesham and Amersham byelection, largely fought on planning grounds), but it is now looking increasingly more likely that the plans will instead be paused.

Rhion wrote earlier this week about how the new Secretary of State could bolster public confidence in the reforms, and also made brief reference at the end of his piece to the fact that the response to the consultation is now very long overdue. The Government Consultation Principles state, in principle J, that Government responses to consultations should be published in a timely fashion- more particularly that within 12 weeks of the consultation responses should be published or an explanation provided as to why this is not possible.

The Planning for the Future consultation closed on 29^th October 2020, so by the government principles we should have had either response or an explanation by 21^st January 2021. By our reckoning, this makes it 273 days overdue. Now, the Government will no doubt argue that the delay is in part down to covid difficulties- this has been a consistent line when questioned on administrative issues, but even taking this into account 273 days is very clearly far too long.

Government responses to consultations being late is of course not a rare occurrence. It happens reasonably frequently and in most of the cases where it happens, we see no announcement or updated response date, as the guidance would indicate should appear. The only time it ever really is addressed is when it directly affects the interests of an MP and they raise it in the House. At that point, the relevant minister will stand at the despatch box and solemnly announce that the government will respond either “soon” or, in less optimal circumstances “in due course” (in Parliament this week Jacob Rees-Mogg opted for the latter).

Responding in good time to consultations (even where there are not specific principles requiring it) is good practice for any consultor. Not only does it reduce the chances of accusations of results-fiddling being raised, but it is also key to maintaining good relationships with consultees. Public consultation and engagement in policy-making is closely tied up with transparency, and ensuring there are not huge gaps between the end of the consultation and the publication of a response ensures that the consultation is effective, and the decision is not made long after the nuances of a consultation or engagement exercise have fled from the minds of decision makers.

Planning your consultation in advance is always crucial, and planning for response too should be an important part of it. Although the consultation might close on a certain date, it is not over until the entire beginning-end process of planning-substance-response is complete. We’ll be pressing the Government a little more on this one, to see if we can get their response- or at the very least, remind them that they have obligations…