National planning - Transport Policy and Planning in Great Britain - page 276

Planning is no panacea - it cannot guarantee that a consensus will be reached and
that a decision will prove to have been the most appropriate in the light of subsequent
events. It may achieve better, more 'joined-up' and more acceptable outcomes and
help fulfil wider and longer-term aspirations. But it is also likely to draw attention
to difficult issues that most people, especially elected politicians, might prefer not
having to face. Examples are the likely scale and nature of change taking place in an
area, the conflicting views which people have of how this should be responded to,
and the limited capability which public agencies may have to deal with problems and
opportunities anyway.
Planning can also consume a great deal of time and resources, particularly
where formalised procedures involve long periods devoted to public consultation,
examination and approval. The resulting delay can be criticised for having the effect
of prolonging unsatisfactory conditions, adding to costs and deferring desirable
improvements. Hence the planning procedures which are established have to embody
a balance between two sets of considerations and at any one time there will groups
lobbying for 'speeding up the process' on the one hand and those arguing for more
time to allow for fuller investigations, wider consultation, more rigorous scrutiny of
proposals etc. on the other.
17.3 The pattern of plans
In the public sphere planning is undertaken at several levels. For illustrative purposes
in relation to transport and development three main levels can be identified (the exact
arrangements and terms used in each field will be described later):
• national policy statements
• regional strategies
• local plans.
At each level costed programmes may also be prepared summarising the intended
initiatives to be undertaken within a specified time period, often subdivided by
objective (e.g. road safety or economic regeneration), mode and/or delivery agent.
There is a hierarchical relationship between these plans in that the (more strategic)
policies and proposals determined at a higher level create a framework within which
bodies at lower levels have to work (Figure 17.2). (Even national governments have
to work within the framework of EU and other international agreements they have
signed up to.) At regional and local levels policies and proposals are developed in more
detail, taking account of the implications of national policies for their areas and at the
same time injecting their own policies and priorities.
Note however that, because there is no system of regional government in Great
Britain, national policies impact directly on the work of local authorities as well as
on regional assemblies (in England outside London) and regional partnerships (in
Scotland and Wales). Likewise because these bodies have few, if any, executive powers,
responsibility for delivery of their policies and proposals falls either to separately
created executive agencies (such as the Highways Agency) or to local authorities.
(London is a separate case and its position is explained later.)
Although the pattern depicted above provides a useful conceptual framework it
is important to recognise that its form in practice has varied over time. There are
also differences in the way it is manifested in the fields of transport and development