Yes Minister, the planned planning free-for-all is no longer planned
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Ministers tonight completed an embarrassing retreat over their proposed planning free-for-all.
The Government has been hit by protests by MPs of all parties over moves to let homeowners to build extensions of up to 8m (26ft) without obtaining planning permission - double the current limit. Critics said the moves would provoke rows between neighbours.
Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary, announced that neighbours would be allowed to object to such projects. It would amount to a "light-touch" consultation scheme, he said.
In a letter to MPs last night he acknowledged worries about the "potential impact" of larger extensions on "neighbours' amenity" and concerns over their inability to intervene.
His announcement marked a significant U-turn over an initiative championed by David Cameron as a way of cutting through red tape and providing a boost to the building industry.
The plans will be debated in House of Lords on Monday.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments