How the Government thinks theatres, nightclubs and launderettes are more important than pubs

Often there is the ridiculous situation where Tesco rip out a pub and replace it with a Tesco Express, without needing planning permission - yet then have to apply for planning permission for some signage! This is the sort of thing that brings the planning system into disrepute.

With the demise of the leased tied pubco model which has led to their mass asset stripping, these absurd permitted development rights are being used as a way to offload pub sites to prop up debt ridden companies and are being abused by supermarket chains who indulge in ‘predatory purchasing’ precisely because of these loopholes and the fact that they can impose a store on a community without any objections from residents or shopkeepers.

So the fact is that pubs – including profitable and popular pubs - are being closed and lost forever as a direct result of current Department for Communities and Local Government policy.

Strike a blow​

Whilst there is carte blanche​ to turn pubs in a supermarket whether people want one or not, you can't then turn a shop back into a pub, without needing to get planning permission. Even more bizarrely, the planning system – and therefore the Government - values theatres, launderettes and nightclubs more than pubs. Hardly the position of a “pro-pub Government”.

Last week MPs had a chance to change this - and strike a blow for local democracy - by backing a very basic, commonsensical change that simply would have meant that any developer, pubco or supermarket would need to get planning permission for converting or demolishing a pub. Members of the Parliamentary Save the Pub Group supported a cross party clause tabled by MPs Charlotte Leslie, Grahame Morris, Caroline Lucas, and myself. In the just two days the amendment was available to sign, nearly 40 MPs did so, showing significant support for it.

In a clever move to buy off potential rebels, the Government came forward with a “concession”, though as the Minister let slip in the debate, this was something they planned to do anyway, so not much of a concession in reality at all. All the Government is offering (with no clear route or timetable) is to remove permitted development rights from pubs that have got Asset of Community Value (ACV) status.

Predatory​

So apparently all people will have to do is to get 21 people to write in and lo, all valued pubs in the UK could be given this very basic protection.

Yet the reality is that there are just 1.25% of pubs listed as ACVs - 600 out of around 48,000 pubs in the UK. So even with more listings, in reality this will do nothing to stop the deliberate closure of the vast majority of pubs and their conversion to supermarkets. The vast majority of pubs will still be vulnerable to predatory takeover without any right to object.

There was some worrying misrepresentation from Government too, saying that they couldn’t support the Save the Pub clause due to “red tape” and “unforeseen consequences” (now where have I heard those excuses before...?). In actual fact, giving communities the same right to comment over change of use of a pub as change of use of a theatre, launderette or nightclub would prevent large amounts of bureaucracy and red tape.

Each and every ACV application has to be dealt with and considered by a local authority and each one can cost an estimated one to two thousand pounds. So listing all the valued pubs in the country would cost millions of pounds. So the Government’s approach, at a time of severely constrained public finances, is irresponsible as well as weak and tokenistic.

The ACV scheme does not even exist in Wales, leaving Welsh pubs still wholly vulnerable to predatory purchasing and takeover. The Government forgot to mention that to its Welsh MPs some of whom fell for the concession that will do nothing for their constituents at all.

Bulldozed​

Similarly, suggesting that supermarket need to have carte blanche​ or we will face boarded up derelict pubs is nonsense. Many closed pubs, like the Summercross in my constituency, are deliberately landbanked by developers, often for years, sometimes in the hope they will get the right to demolish as well as convert. Many like the Summercross have already got planning permission!

The reality is that non-viable pubs would simply go through the planning process and be granted change of use, so the simple change we proposed would not stop that in any way - but it would stop the scandal that viable and profitable pubs are being deliberately targeted and converted or bulldozed, with DCLG unwilling to do the simple and obvious thing to stop this. 

So whilst I welcome the very modest step forward in recognising the importance of pubs in the planning system, it is clear that Department for Communities and Local Government are still committed to their ludicrous deregulate at all costs mantra for pubs, whilst ensuring that launderettes can’t become betting shops. It really is one rule for one and exposes a department that doesn’t truly care about pubs.

So the Save the Pub Group will continue to work with CAMRA and others for the simple, commonsensical change of giving pubs the same status as those amenities, so that people get the simple and reasonable right just to comment before a change of use or demolition.

No truly pro pub MP or Government can oppose that. 

Greg Mulholland is MP for Leeds North West and chair, Parliamentary Save the Pub Group​​