How prevalent is unethical and/or corrupt behavior in planning?

[Alan Ambrose]

Like most UK citizens, but certainly not citizens of all other countries, I work on the assumption that our government services 'play cricket'. Often not good quality, speedy or accurate cricket. Sometimes laughably slow, inefficient and incompetent cricket, but 'cricket' nevertheless.

 

I was eating dinner with some new friends recently and (on recounting our planning woes) one senior director-level woman said, 'well it is, of course, the most corrupt government area'. And, I was talking to a supplier recently, who without any prompting from me, started talking about his local LPA, court cases & corruption. I was trying to get him onto the subject of our call, so didn't pursue his thoughts on that subject further.

 

Now, I've already seen quite a lot of sketchy LPA behaviour, some of which I would call unethical.

 

I appreciate that most people here on Buildhub only have one or two datapoints, so can't draw much of a conclusion. And, apologies in advance, if my question affronts those who can't let themselves consider that the world is not always squeaky clean.

 

But I'm interested in everyone's views.

[joe90]

Despite having fought planners a few times (and won) I have no evidence of corruption but I would call them generally inept, full of self importance and blinkered in their approach. I am sure they are also underfunded which can’t help.

[mjc55]

Would second @joe90 view to be honest.

 

I worked as a AT for about 10 years or so in Wiltshire, all relatively minor stuff I admit, and not once did I think that decisions were made other than on merit.

 

Obviously there were times when some negotiation was required and odd times when officers thought processes could be questioned.  I actually put that down to overwork to be honest most of the time.

 

Now, obviously there is a world of difference between an application to extend and one for a housing estate, and obviously a lot more money involved in the latter.  In those instances it is difficult to comment to be honest other than to say that are obviously bad-apples in all walks of life and I am sure planning is not immune to this.

[Onoff]

I heard rumours of a planner's plans, plans that should never have been passed, getting "lost" within the planning office system. The plans were passed given the length of time they'd been "lost".

[Pocster]

Planning is all a bit Greg Wallace imho 

 

They lie like (expletive deleted) . They say they never wrote / said that .

 

With emails and voice recordings you of course have proof . They tend not to like that , which means you’re gonna win 😊

Edited December 3 by Pocster

[SteamyTea]

Hanlon's Razor

[Jilly]

@Alan Ambrose Do you think they might have been confusing the planning departments with parish councils? Or did they mean the whole system? 

[ToughButterCup]

3 hours ago, Alan Ambrose said:

...

Now, I've already seen quite a lot of sketchy LPA behaviour, some of which I would call unethical.

...

 

Ditto.

But it would be unwise of me to detail it here.

Here's an article written by a man I really respect on the subject : Martin Goodhall.  A Planning Expert, and a lawyer - a tad out of date but really worth the read.

[Alan Ambrose]

@Jilly

 

I think they both meant the planning departments. My feeling is that Parish Councils are mostly irrelevant i.e. having little influence re planning but I may be wrong.

 

 

[Alan Ambrose]

I found this while I was searching for the original Telegraph article referred to by Martin Goodhall:

 

https://redbrickblog.co.uk/2020/11/a-wink-and-a-nudge-to-corruption-in-our-planning-system/

[Tony L]

There was an article about this in The Times recently too.  The writer’s view was that planning is the most corrupt area of local government & is well overdue for reform. There is very little oversight from above.  The problems are well known.  National government is doing next to nothing about these problems.  Planning departments don’t have to follow the rules.  Many behave however they please.

 

I don’t think all planning departments are corrupt.  I even know of one where I suspect they’re neither corrupt, nor inept. 

 

From what I remember of the Times article, one of the ways some these nasty senior planners help themselves, rather than the communities they’re paid to serve, is they’ll give the “go ahead” to a huge & controversial development scheme that most independent observers think should not go ahead.  12 months or so later, the former senior planner is being employed by the big organisation that benefited from the scheme his team approved, earning many multiples of his previous salary.

 

Most people don’t realise, we live in a very corrupt country.  Most people just swallow the establishment propaganda that seeks to give the impression we’re so much better than almost everywhere else.  Of course we’re not as bad as some other developed nations: America, for example, where presidents are able to (& indeed do, as happened this week) issue a get out of jail free card to family members who are just about to be given a lengthy jail term.  That would likely cause a riot here.  In America they just shrug their shoulders, & think, “It’s the American way.”.

 

Last time I checked the corruption perceptions index, I think the UK was something like the joint 18^th most corrupt country (out of about 200), which is not good for a country that’s been a democracy for so long & has the world’s 6^th largest GDP.  & our 18^th position, or whatever, was awarded before ITV brought the details of the Fujitsu - Post Office – Ed Davey scandal to the masses.  Up until then successive governments had largely ignored, & indeed facilitated this corruption.

[Alan Ambrose]

Ah yes, 20th now below Uruguay and Estonia (no offence meant):

 

https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023

 

[SteamyTea]

11 hours ago, Jilly said:

parish councils

 

 

[saveasteading]

Not corrupt. 

Essay may follow.

[saveasteading]

I've dealt with planning in perhaps 12 councils. Scores of applications. Applications in 10, and also meeting them in working groups in 2 of these.

I think they were all behaving honestly.

Of course they are people, and some are less competent, organised, modest, strong willed, hard working than others. Some will tend to bend as required by bullying councillors, developers etc. Do they respond to bribes or threats? Not that I have heard.

 

Parish councils are amateurs. They can't be made to go on training courses. Some are there for their own ends, there is no doubt, and will bully and lie and use their position.

Most are there for the best of reasons but can be bullied by the former and by the public...and often will leave. Is that corruption? No, but bullying is as bad.

 

Parish councils can't control planning anyway, only advise. 

 

Bigger councils have more clout. The elected members  are usually  also politically linked. You are into the world of lobbying and lunches. 

Most are doing the best they can. 

 

I think it's too easy to assume corruption is behind decisions we don't like. The ones who cast blame are those least likely to put themselves forward for public service.

[Bramco]

2 hours ago, saveasteading said:

Parish councils can't control planning anyway, only advise. 

 

My understanding is that a Parish Council's view are treated as if they are a comment by a member of the public.   And unless they actually bring up specific planning issues, then they are ignored, as are those from members of the public.

 

Sensible Parish Councils won't object to applications unless there is a valid planning legislation point to be made.  But there are a lot of NIMBYS around in Parish Councils.....

 

[saveasteading]

5 hours ago, Bramco said:

Parish Council's view are treated as if they are a comment by a member of the public

Correct. They have 2 advantages though. They will get to speak for 3 minutes if the application goes to committee. There is an element of authority.

That counts for nothing if the planning constraints are not followed.

6 hours ago, Bramco said:

there are a lot of NIMBYS around in Parish Councils.....

That's generally pejorative of course. But nobody in a nice place wants it spoiled. A neighbourhood plan is the answer.

[Alan Ambrose]

I think that’s its very possible my dinner companion had read the Times article based on Transparency International’s report. I was amused to find that Southwark, which I know, was singled out by TI as being particularly dodgy. Most of the suggested questionable behaviour seems to be related to councillors who also work as property advisors and lobbyists.

[ToughButterCup]

The Problem Description is simple:  There is a problem in the Planning sector.

 

Whats the answer?

[SteamyTea]

13 minutes ago, ToughButterCup said:

There is a problem in the Planning sector

Or is there.

Maybe the problem is in the legislation they have to follow.

 

(SteamyTea's Law states: "for every law we have, we have another one that makes it illegal")

Edited December 5 by SteamyTea

[saveasteading]

Everyone critical here, please attend your local council planning committee as a visitor having read up on the applications. Then report back.

[Bramco]

8 hours ago, saveasteading said:

A neighbourhood plan is the answer.

Agreed - which is why we did one!

Unfortunately as we were doing it, a builder with options on a plot of land the village would not have prioritized for new housing found a planning department desperate for quick fixes to their housing shortage. So that was accepted into the Borough LPPt2 as allocated and therefore something we had to accept.

A great way of saving land that locals don't think should be allocated, is to designate them as 'local green space' in the neighbourhood plan. This in effect makes planning apply the criteria for Green Belt to any decision.

Our plan prioritised a number of small plots which added up to about the same as the large plot the Borough allocated.

 

More than 5 years on, only one of these plots have been built on - a brown field site in the middle of the village - the old British Legion site.  The large plot allocated by the Borough has only had some preliminary work done.

[Bramco]

2 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

Everyone critical here, please attend your local council planning committee as a visitor having read up on the applications. Then report back.

We did several times.  And on our application spoke for the 3 minutes - which landed on deaf ears.  The councillors were completely ignorant of the actual legislation for building in the Green Belt and got it totally wrong, as had planning in their advice to the committee.  We took it to appeal and won - the appeal effectively said - 'you're numpties, the application is obviously within the specific clause for the Green Belt of 'infill within a village'.   

 

The whole thing was quite stressful.  Given the borough has a lot of Green Belt, you would have expected planning in their advice to the ctte and the ctte to know what they are doing.

[Alan Ambrose]

I’m intending to visit the next couple. From the ones I’ve seen online, they seem mostly as dull as ditchwater. ‘Point of order chairman….’ etc.

[saveasteading]

27 minutes ago, Alan Ambrose said:

mostly as dull as ditchwater.

It's much more interesting being there.

The only ones going to committee are big or controversial.  But there is 'people watching' too which you wont get online.

Get there early and see if councillors are discussing items.  Try to work out which, if any, have looked at the documents.

Is the planner having to explain policy to councillors? It is as interesting as you make it.

52 minutes ago, Bramco said:

you would have expected planning in their advice to the ctte and the ctte to know what they are doing.

Hoped perhaps.  There are useless planners like in every walk of life. And the number of times i have heard the head of planning or chairman explaining utter basics to the members!