13th March 2007, 02:25 PM
Troll might be correct in that there appears to be no real mention of standards etc, although we might anticipate that such mention would be in the replacement PPG as and when one is produced in response to new legislation. However it would have been nice to see some sort of commitment to upholding statndards in the White Paper.
hb - there is some discussion of the extra costs in the Regulatory Impact Assessment that accompanies the White Paper, but no real way of checking the basis for the the figures that are put forward in the RIA, eg. £400K from 2010/11 (England only) for the devolution of responsibility for SMC from DCMS/EH to LPAs. What is slightly more worrying here is the statement that the costs of the negotiation and monitoring of the new Heritage Partnership Agreements (HPAs) would not be considered a new burden.
Perhaps I am just a little bit touchy about this issue, but has anyone else looked at the make-up of the Steering Committee for the Heritage Protection Review. It is chaired by someone from Equity Land Ltd (i.e property investors) and includes a few other people from similar companies and organisations (Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd, Rockspring Property Investment Managers Ltd, Country Land and Business Association) as well as the Church of England and assorted civil servants (DCMS, DCLG, EH). I know that the HPR needed to be aware of the potential concerns of developers and property managers but to me it seems as if the Review was actually being driven by this sector rather than by the 'custodians' of the heritage.
Beamo
hb - there is some discussion of the extra costs in the Regulatory Impact Assessment that accompanies the White Paper, but no real way of checking the basis for the the figures that are put forward in the RIA, eg. £400K from 2010/11 (England only) for the devolution of responsibility for SMC from DCMS/EH to LPAs. What is slightly more worrying here is the statement that the costs of the negotiation and monitoring of the new Heritage Partnership Agreements (HPAs) would not be considered a new burden.
Perhaps I am just a little bit touchy about this issue, but has anyone else looked at the make-up of the Steering Committee for the Heritage Protection Review. It is chaired by someone from Equity Land Ltd (i.e property investors) and includes a few other people from similar companies and organisations (Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd, Rockspring Property Investment Managers Ltd, Country Land and Business Association) as well as the Church of England and assorted civil servants (DCMS, DCLG, EH). I know that the HPR needed to be aware of the potential concerns of developers and property managers but to me it seems as if the Review was actually being driven by this sector rather than by the 'custodians' of the heritage.
Beamo