Government Response to the CLG Committee’s Report Abolition of RSS: a plann - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Out of interest has anyone heard anything about the "voluntary" Environmental Assessments that are supposedly being undertaken? Presumably a Scoping Report has been (will be?) produced and there will be some level of consultation with the relevant authorities and the public before a final decision on the options appraised (I'm interested to see the reasonable alternatives!) is taken, for any degree of compliance with the SEA Directive to be suggested.

Mystery announced in April wasnt it By now they would have tendered and scoping reports you would have thought. Perhaps they have decided to save money and not do realising that at the end of the day the ministerial announcements on the abolition would have been 'predetermination' of the outcome -im thinking the Seascale Investments Caselaw here http://www.ukela.org/content/page/2259/ELM-20-5-Jones-final.pdf So the revocation orders were likely to be successfully challenged in court. If they had legal advice to this effect perhaps they have decided to save money and not do it, leaving RSS around just getting older and older to be rendered 'out of date' in the new NPPF. If I am wrong then might not the government publish the scoping reports and prove me wrong?

Looking at issues of consultation on the scoping of an SEA, it will be interesting to see how the Secretary of State addresses the views of the Advocate General with respect of the Seaport investment case currently before the European Court - http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2011/C47410_O.html. In this case the Advocate General comments that The Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland cannot, in the same way as it prepares its plan, formulate constructive criticism of its draft and propose alternative solutions other than the choices which it has already made. In addition, although it is one of the authorities best able to defend environmental interests, it must nevertheless be in a position to take into consideration opinions and concerns which may be held, for example, by more specialised bodies or local authorities affected by the plan because of its geographical scope. The Advocate General then concluded that: Article 6(3) of Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment must be interpreted as meaning that, where the authority responsible for the plan is also the authority designated by national law for purposes of the consultation procedure, the Member State must designate a new consultation authority which is separate from and independent of the first. Whilst recognising this is only the views of the Advocate General, it will be interesting to see how thhe final decision of the European Court in this matter. This could then have implications for which organisations should be consulted in undertaking the Scoping on the SEA associated with revocation of the RSS.

Duh tyypo - the link was of course to the Seaport case, the same one as referred to by Graham