Reflections on The White Paper

Key points I picked up from the seminar and the reading:

- Planning will occur under three categories (protected zones, renewal zones, growth zones)

- Once land has been allocated as a zone, it is assumed that the land designated has ‘permission in principle’. This means that local councils and community will have less control over what their towns and cities look like.

- It will take time for this new system to be in place.

- The new White Paper document will override local plans and neighbourhood plans. Again meaning that the local community is less involved and have less of a say.

- There is an emphasis on using technology to make planning "more accessible" to people. However, this is not guaranteed to work as this could target only a specific group of people. This also does not mean that people have any control in what actually happens in their areas.

- The document states that first homes are to be a priority, but this could actually have a negative impact as many first time buyers who use shared ownerships homes as a route into home ownership because it is more affordable.

- There are concerns on how the document fails to address climate change. There is a lack of detail on how net zero carbon will be achieved by 2050.

- Another key aim is to create places with character and that are beautiful. The presentation given by Hooman in the seminar pointed out that the interpretation of what is beautiful is from a white and privileged perspective. Leading to questions such as; Who are you building for? Will the Georgian and Edwardian style that is referred to in the document fit in with every community?

Reflection:

After listening to the seminar, reading some articles, and having discussions in the webinar; it seems to me that The White Paper is quite a performative document. I say this because it states that planning should be more accessible to people and that initiatives will be put in place to make buying your first home easier. However, it seems as though the document has been written with a certain group of people in mind and marginalised people are not being considered or consulted.

Under pillar 2 of the RTPI's Planning White Paper on a Single Sheet, it states that a "fast track process for beauty" will be introduced. This statement makes me feel quite uncomfortable as, in my opinion, a lot of what makes a place 'beautiful' is not merely the aesthetic qualities, but the history of the place, the people that make a city or town diverse and filled with culture. I also think that beauty can take a lot of time, and having a "fast track process" has connotations with a mass producing conveyor belt resulting in many places looking and feeling the same.

I feel as though the White Paper is a document with a number of contradictions that have been sparking a many debates within the planning profession. It will be interesting to see what changes take place over the coming years.