Augustine's presentation

465 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
465
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Augustine's presentation

  1. 1. INTRODUCTIONThis presentation is on the merits of Localism bill(Big society) over the Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS). It will begin with a brief discussion of the RSS and then the Localism bill. It will then end with the summary of main points of argument.
  2. 2. REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGIES• The RSS became operational with the introduction of planning and compulsory purchase Act of 2004. It is a major element of the Labour government agenda for speeding up planning system and ensuring sustainable development (Glasson and Marshall, 2007)
  3. 3. KEY ISSUES IN RSS The RSS was enacted to provide a broad development strategy for a fifteen to twenty year period and it was targeted to achieve the following;• Delivering sustainable economic prosperity and growth• Identification of the scale and distribution of provision for new housing• Creating sustainable and mixed communities e.t.c. (Haughton, Allmendiger, Counsell, and Vigar, 2010)
  4. 4. LOCALISM BILL (BIG SOCIETY)The coalition Government in 2010 abolished the topdown approach to planning (RSS) and introduced whatis called OPEN SOURCE PLANNING SYSTEM or the bigsociety. In his speech, the prime minister said, “the jobof government is not to run people’s lives, rather tohelp people to run their own lives’’ (BBC, 2011). Local authorities are best placed to plan forsustainable development that meets the aspirations oflocal communities and government wants to seedecision making powers over housing and planningdecentralised to local authorities and communities(CLG, 2010)
  5. 5. RATIONALE FOR ABOLISHING REGIONAL STRATEGIES• IT IS EXPENSIVE, COMPLEX AND TIME CONSUMING – it takes an average of four years before a final RSS draft could be published. This created instability and uncertainty for the local communities. The RSS is also very expensive to operate. The running of various board leaders that oversee the revision, implementation and monitoring of regional strategies at both central and local level means a lot of financial burden for the government (HM, 2011)
  6. 6. • THE STRATEGIES ADOPTED IN PREPARING IT ATTRACT A HIGH LEVEL OF PUBLIC OPPOSITION – practically, the RSS have created a sort of imbalance in communities, setting them against growth proposals generally and housing targets in particular. The prolonged process in implementing RSS means that it has failed to provide the ideal aspiration for communities and investors (CLG, 2011)
  7. 7. WHAT THE LOCALISM BILL INTENDS TO ACHIEVE (MERITS)• Increase in infrastructural and affordable housing delivery• Empowering local communities• Increase local control of public finance• Open up government to public scrutiny
  8. 8. CONCLUSION• Increase people’s confidence in government• Participatory government where the local communities have a big say in issues affecting them• Efficient services and good leadership• Adequate utilisation of taxpayers pounds
  9. 9. REFERENCES* Cameron. (2011). Big society is my ‘mission’. Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12443396 [ACCESSED] 14/03/11]* CLG (2010) Decentralisation and the localism Bill, an essential guide; Available at http://www.communities.gov.uk [ACCESSED] 18/03/11* Graham Haughton, Philip Allmendinger, David Counsell and Geoff Vigar (2010), The new Spatial Planning, Routledge* House of Commons (2011) Abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies: a planning vacuum; Available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmcomloc/517/5 17.pdf [ACCESSED] 14/03/11* John Glasson and Tim Marshall (2007) ‘Regional Planning’, Routledge

×