Welsh national planning process alienates communities and should be reviewed, says campaigner

Martin Shipton

A campaigner who has helped local communities voice their concerns about controversial planning proposals says there is an urgent need to review how the Welsh Government’s Developments of National Significance process is working.

Dr Grace Lloyd, of Abercarn in Caerphilly county borough believes that current arrangements are undemocratic, unfairly biased against members of local communities and are unfit for purpose. She claims the DNS process excludes engagement with most of the community members who will be affected by such developments, which include wind farms, pylons and other infrastructure proposals.

Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW) was established in 2021 as a new division of the Welsh Government. Among its functions is the assessment of planning applications considered to be of national significance that are taken out of the hands of local authorities.

Documentation

In a letter sent by Dr Lloyd to Members of the Senedd who represent seats in the South Wales East region, she states: “Both public and statutory consultations are poorly publicised. These are the points at which the public has an opportunity to submit comments or objections.

“Documentation on the PEDW casework portal is presented in a way that makes it extremely difficult to search for and find information.

“Readability scores of application and project documents are mostly at post-graduate level. This means they are inaccessible to the local community, living in some of the most deprived communities of the UK, with 44% of people in south east Wales having a reading age of seven or below, according to the Welsh Government’s report National Survey of Adult Skills in Wales 2010.

“Multiple statutory consultations for developments in the same area are launched concurrently, or close together, resulting in confusion and overload for the community trying to make representations.

“The only means of commenting on a DNS application is by finding, reading, and understanding the relevant information published on the PEDW casework portal, and responding in writing at the correct time. The short paragraph on the portal providing instructions for commenting has a readability level of Year 13 (A-level), indicating the text is complex and may be difficult for most readers to understand.”

Petition

Dr Lloyd goes on to explain that she is a member of a voluntary group set up to inform the community about the planned developments in the Abercarn area. She states: “We gained a good response by using social media to communicate and help local residents understand what is being planned. We also devised an automated email system to support people in writing representations.

“Over 500 responses to the two statutory consultations were received by PEDW. This led to a request from PEDW that we should raise a petition instead, as dealing with the public’s comments had increased the burden on their caseworkers. However, every single representation was personalised and contained a personal comment from a concerned member of the community. Some responses were very short, and some mistakenly commented on the wrong application, as two were running concurrently. However, the basic principle of democracy is surely that each community voice deserves to be listened to with respect.

“Frequently we hear about a lack of response to planning exercises, indicating public indifference or laziness. The approach our group has used for the Mynydd Maen statutory consultations has shown this is not correct.”

RES, which describes itself as the world’s largest independent renewable energy company, proposes to build a 13-turbine wind farm between Cwmbran and Newbridge.

Appropriate language

Dr Lloyd states: “If PEDW engaged with communities using appropriate language and accessible communication channels I predict they would find, as our group did, that people do care very deeply about developments on their doorstep, and they do have very strong opinions which deserve to be heard. It is simply the exclusive nature of the DNS process that results in low engagement.

“It is extremely unjust when PEDW reject and dismiss responses from the community that may be basic or contain inaccuracies. I find this rather contemptuous attitude to be representative of the entire tone of the DNS process. Rather than making the process accessible to ordinary people, blame is heaped on the shortcomings of local residents for not responding in accordance with the limited means currently available to them.

“The DNS process undermines the very principles of democracy, leaving ordinary people feeling there is no point engaging, even if they could access and understand the information, as they will not be listened to. Sadly, it seems this belief currently has some grain of truth in it.”

Shortcomings

Dr Lloyd lists a series of what she sees as shortcomings in the process that alienates ordinary people:

Inadequate publicity. A limited group of people, mostly those who have previously registered an interest with PEDW, are notified when a statutory consultation begins. In addition, posters are displayed on lamp posts. These are easy to miss and use language which is difficult for most people to read and understand.

It is extremely challenging to locate information in DNS applications on the PEDW casework portal. Locating a single piece of information can take several hours of searching. In many cases the documents are not indexed, so it is virtually impossible to find a single item of information, even when you know what you’re looking for.

Inaccessible language used by PEDW and applicants. As an example of the complexity of the documentation provided, I offer this example. Each application includes a Non-Technical Summary, which is designed to simplify and summarise the key points of the application so it can be understood by ordinary local people. I ran the Hemingway readability checker on the Non-Technical Summary for Pennant Walters’ Trecelyn application. Hemingway found that the summary document would require the reading skills of a post-graduate to comprehend it. What chance do ordinary local people have of accessing, understanding and interpreting the applications, if this is the simplified version? I feel that the current DNS planning process excludes and disenfranchises people with basic levels of literacy. It effectively cuts off the opportunity to engage for many people from some of Wales’ most deprived socioeconomic groups, living in the area surrounding Mynydd Maen.

Concurrent applications causing confusion and overload. Two of the statutory consultations for adjacent developments on Mynydd Maen were launched a week apart over Christmas 2024. Despite being granted extra time, the timing disrupted our community’s response as many people were away and distracted. Two concurrent statutory consultations meant that local communities effectively had only half as much time to read and respond to enormous volumes of complex technical documents. The current statutory consultation period for Mynydd Maen Wind Farm spans two Bank Holiday weekends, once again when many people are away. At the same time, we are also studying additional information provided and preparing for hearings for the previous two applications. It is almost as if there is a deliberate attempt to overwhelm, exhaust and confuse potential objectors.

Lack of expertise available to communities to help with understanding and responding to DNS applications. Our group of inexperienced volunteers has needed to raise funds to pay for a specialist to help us understand and respond to the complex technical documentation and processes needed to engage with the DNS process. The odds are unfairly stacked against our local communities, who are identified as some of the most deprived in Wales and also the UK (Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2019). Our communities need help to fund additional technical expertise to help us interpret and respond to complex and technical DNS developments.

Undemocratic

Dr Lloyd concludes: “The process followed by PEDW for approval of DNS applications is unfair, undemocratic and excludes the majority of local community members. The documentation is obtuse and hard for people to access and understand. The practice of releasing multiple concurrent statutory consultations regarding the same area causes confusion, such that representations often refer to the wrong application and are rejected by PEDW. It appears to me that the process is designed to make engagement as difficult as possible for ordinary members of the community to understand and respond to.

“PEDW should pause DNS applications immediately and review their process to make it fairer and more accessible for communities to engage with.”

A spokesperson for the Welsh Government responded: “There are several opportunities for the public to engage with applications for Developments of National Significance. PEDW has published guidance for communities, as well as a thorough procedure guide that sets out the process in detail.

“Inspectors carefully consider all representations received as part of their rigorous examination of such applications and will explain the reasons for their recommendations in full in their final reports, which are published alongside the decision.

“PEDW makes people aware of applications in a range of means including: direct letters to residents in the vicinity of the site and those who have previously registered an interest in the development; advertisement in local newspapers; site notices in the vicinity of the site; publication on our website; and, direct consultation with local consultees including the local planning authority, community councils and local councillors.

“Inspectors are obliged to determine applications as they are submitted and occasionally this will result in two or more applications in close proximity being processed at the same time. However, this can have benefits of considering cumulative impacts at the same time through the consultation and subsequent examination.”