Planning minister Greg Clark said the changes in England were “absolutely crucial” but he also agrezzzed to talk to op-ponents of the proposals.He said “particular aspects” could be addressed if groups such as the National Trust felt they were unclear.Shadow communities minister Jack Dromey said he welcomed the govern-ment’s willing-ness to talk.Mr Clark said the govern-ment would not back down

on its aim to boost house-building and encourage business.Campaign-ers say they fear excessive development under the Draft National Planning Policy Framework.The plan, pub-lished in July, streamlines policy that is currently more than 1,000 pages down to just 52 and features a presumption of “sustainable development”.The Depart-ment for Communities and Local Government says it intends

to transform a system whose “volume and complex-ity have made planning increasingly inaccessible to all but special-ists”.

But the National Trust said the plans “failed to pro-tect the every-day places that local communi-ties love” while the Campaign to Protect Rural England said the govern-ment needed “to listen and make further improvements or the conse-quences for the English coun-tryside and the

character of our towns and villages will be grave”.

‘In imes of a worrying economy, local councils look in-creasingly to reclaim abandoned spaces. But are all brown field sites suitable for redevelopment?’

‘Good For Business’

Greg Clark de-fends reforms to the current systemMr Clark told the BBC it was “absolutely crucial” for the government to simplify plan-ning processes so that homes could be built and to encour-age business.“We’re build-ing fewer homes than can accom-modate young people that need to be housed, we’ve got a problem of homelessness, overcrowding, poverty as rents rise.“For compa-nies expand-

ing or relocat-ing they need a new building and it’s crucial that when they’re think-ing of Britain as a place to relocate they know they won’t have to wait years with vast expense and uncertainty.”The hous-ing minister denied there would be any backtracking on the plans, despite his agreement to hold talks.He said it was “quite right” to consult because of the extent of the changes, and invited

opponents to be very spe-cific about any concerns.“Let’s be forensic about this - if there are particular aspects or sentences that you don’t think express clearly enough the protections that are there, then let’s talk about it.

Labour’s Jack Dromey wel-comed the government’s decision to talk to campaign groups, but said ministers’ previous stance showed “how out of touch they are”.“Labour is in favour of sus-tainable devel-

opment - but what the Tory-led government are offering is a downgrading of the rules which protect our natural environ-ment.”Mr Clark also criticised the Na-tional Trust for using pictures of Los Angeles in its campaign

against the plans.He said that such large-scale urban sprawl was “not going to happen here” and reiter-ated the govern-ment’s commit-ment to protect the green belt, national parks and areas of outstanding

natural beauty.Councils would also have more responsibility under the new regime - which would mean better planning decisions, ar-gued Mr Clark.

Shaun Spiers, the chief ex-ecutive of the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Eng-land, rejected Mr Clark’s assurances and said the proposals would give too much say to develop-ers.“What the government is talking about is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, but if you

read the National Planning Policy Frame-work in its draft form, what is clear is that is a presumption in favour of development, and at every point sustain-ability is undermined.“What they’re really talking about is a policy of ‘build, build, build’. This is about economic development.

It’s about prosperity over people and places.”Peter Nixon, the Na-tional Trust’s director of conservation, welcomed Mr Clark’s invita-tion to hold talks but also criticised the changes.He told the Times news-paper that the govern-ment had the right “aspira-tions” but the proposals cur-rently did not

allow plan-ning authori-ties to make decisions in a “balanced way”.