The UK Mineral Products Association (MPA) says it has repeatedly sought for the burden of planning to be reduced on its members. Specifically it has led the case for the re-evaluation of the current Review of Old Mineral Permissions (ROMPs) process and the ‘opt-in’ for mineral development, where members can choose whether to go for a national or local planning approach. Consequently, MPA welcomes the UK Growth and Infrastructure Act, which has received Royal Assent. The Act gives mineral planning authoritie
The UK Mineral Products Association (MPA) says it has repeatedly sought for the burden of planning to be reduced on its members.
Specifically it has led the case for the re-evaluation of the current Review of Old Mineral Permissions (ROMPs) process and the ‘opt-in’ for mineral development, where members can choose whether to go for a national or local planning approach.
Consequently, MPA welcomes the UK Growth and Infrastructure Act, which has received Royal Assent.
The Act gives mineral planning authorities the power to choose whether a review of old mineral permissions is necessary or not, and for the industry to elect whether to have a major mineral application classed as Nationally Significant Infrastructure and considered by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.
These, says MPA, are key positive changes that will reduce bureaucracy and cost.
However, although MPA believes that the Growth and Infrastructure Act is a positive step, there is still a long way to go.
Most mineral plans are out of date: at the end of January 2013, less than 50% of mineral planning authorities in England had an adopted Core Strategy and six had not started the process.
Average replenishment rates of aggregate reserves are continuing to decline: less than 50% of sand and gravel reserves were replenished in the last ten years to 2010 and only around 67% of hard rock reserves.
Nigel Jackson, chief executive MPA, said: “Concerns remain about the maintenance of future supply. With too few plans, low landbanks, diminishing replenishment rates, increasing costs, and planning inertia fuelling uncertainty we are storing up supply problems for the recovery.
“Lack of demand is masking underlying supply problems for the future.”
