The lack of detail in the Government's controversial planning regime is preventing MPs from undertaking effective scrutiny of the proposed system, a select committee chair has warned.

Clive Betts, chair of the communities and local government select committee, said the rationalised regulation plan – under fire because its ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development' has been attacked as favouring developments at the expense of local community wishes - is presenting MPs with ‘some difficulty'.

Speaking at an event in Westminster last night, Mr Betts told The MJ it was difficult to scrutinise the detail of the proposed National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) because it is deliberately designed to streamline procedures and reduce bureaucracy.

This raised the possibility ‘that all that happens is the local authorities carry more guidance into this rather than the Government,' Mr Betts added.

He said the wording of the draft NPPF presented unique difficulties.

‘If new words are used in planning they will get back to the courts and be decided outside parliament rather than inside [it], where it belongs' Mr Betts said.

He mentioned specifically the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development' clause and the test of whether the benefits of a proposed project outweighed the drawbacks.

Mr Betts said a project's benefits have to ‘demonstrably and significantly' outweigh drawbacks and added that his committee would look into how this could be interpreted.

The MP's words echo recent concerns by Sir Simon Jenkins in his capacity as a spokesman for the National Trust. Sir Simon described the NPPF as a lawyers' charter.

However, Mr Betts praised the Government for publishing a consultative draft policy. It meant Government ‘might actually get something right' through an open consultation - because the discussion makes it ‘more easy to accept that you got things wrong'.