‘Good for business’Greg Clark defends reforms to the current system Mr Clark told the BBC it was “absolutely crucial” for the government to simplify planning processes so that homes could be built and to encourage business.“We’re building fewer homes than can ac-commodate young people that need to be housed, we’ve got a problem of homelessness, overcrowding, poverty as rents rise.“For companies expanding or relocating they need a new build-ing and it’s crucial that when they’re thinking of Britain as a place to relocate they know they won’t have to wait years with vast expense and uncertainty.”The housing minister denied there would be any backtracking on the plans, despite his agree-ment to hold talks.He said it was “quite right” to consult be-cause of the extent of the changes, and invited opponents to be very specific about any concerns. “Let’s be forensic about this - if there are particular aspects or sentences that you don’t think express clearly enough the protections that are there, then let’s talk about it.

‘Good for business’

Labour’s Jack Dromey welcomed the government’s decision to talk to campaign groups, but said min-isters’ previous stance showed “how out of touch they are”.“Labour is in favour of sustainable devel-opment - but what the Tory-led government are offering is a downgrading of the rules which protect our natural environment.”Mr Clark also criticised the National Trust for using pictures of Los Angeles in its campaign against the plans.He said that such large-scale urban sprawl was “not going to happen here” and reiterated the government’s commitmentto protect the green belt, national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty.Councils would also have more responsibility under the new regime - which would mean better planning decisions, argued Mr Clark. Shaun Spiers, the chief executive of the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, rejected Mr Clark’s assurances and said the pro-posals would give too much say to developers.“What the government is talking about is a presump-tion in favour of sustainable development, but if you read the National Planning Policy Framework in its draft form, what is clear is that is a presumption in favour of development, and at every point sus-tainability is undermined.“What they’re really talking about is a policy of ‘build, build, build’. This is about economic development. It’s about prosperity over people and places.”Peter Nixon, the National Trust’s director of conservation, welcomed Mr Clark’s invitation to hold talks but also criticised the changes.He told the Times newspaper that the government had the right “aspirations” but the propos-als currently did not allow planning authorities to make decisions in a “balancedwa way”.

Labour’s Jack Dromey welcomed the government’s decision to talk to campaign groups, but said min-isters’ previous stance showed “how out of touch they are”.“Labour is in favour of sustainable devel-opment - but what the Tory-led government are offering is a downgrading of the rules which protect our natural environment.”Mr Clark also criticised the National Trust for using pictures of Los Angeles in its campaign against the plans.He said that such large-scale urban sprawl was “not going to happen here” and reiterated the government’s commitmentto protect the green belt, national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty.Councils would also have more responsibility under the new regime - which would mean better planning decisions, argued Mr Clark. Shaun Spiers, the chief executive of the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, rejected Mr Clark’s assurances and said the pro-posals would give too much say to developers.“What the government is talking about is a presump-tion in favour of sustainable development, but if you read the National Planning Policy Framework in its draft form, what is clear is that is a presumption in favour of development, and at every point sus-tainability is undermined.“What they’re really talking about is a policy of ‘build, build, build’. This is about economic development. It’s about prosperity over people and places.”Peter Nixon, the National Trust’s director of conservation, welcomed Mr Clark’s invitation to hold talks but also criticised the changes.He told the Times newspaper that the government had the right “aspirations” but the propos-als currently did not allow planning authorities to make decisions in a “balancedwa way”.