Notes for the Guidance of Inspectors Holding Inquiries into orders and Special Road Schemes.

6. The Scope of the Inquiry

The Orders before the Inspector

6.1 The Inspector should always bear in mind what he or she has been appointed to inquire into and therefore upon what he/she is required to make recommendations. The Inspector should be careful to confine his or her consideration to matters within the scope of the inquiry and resist broadening that consideration into matters that are not directly involved in the orders . In the case of an inquiry into supplementary or variation orders, the Inspector should never permit the reopening of matters upon which a decision has already been made after a previous inquiry. For example, an inquiry into objections to a supplementary proposal to build an interchange on a motorway, the line of which has already been fixed after a previous inquiry, does not provide any kind of opportunity for the question of the line of the motorway to be re-opened. Any representations made in writing in such regard should nevertheless be accepted and attached to the Inspector's report. Paragraph 6.22 below deals with this point in relation to the limits of evidence at inquiries into CPOs.

Government Policies and Methodologies, Design Standards, Economic Assumptions and Forecasts of Traffic Growth

6.2 The merits and foundations of policies, methodologies, design standards, economic assumptions and forecasts of traffic growth adopted by the Government are not matters for argument at inquiries. Any arguments about them must take place at national level. This is clear from a statement in the House of Lords on 25 February 1976 (Appendix A to these Notes) and the judgement of Lord Diplock in the case of Bushell and Another v Secretary of State 4 in the Lords on 7 February 1980 (Appendix B). The position has not been changed by any later policy or judgement.

6.3 In general terms the policy issues which are not matters for debate at inquiries are:

1. The allocation of resources to each of the different transport modes.
2. The combination of investment, subsidy, taxation and regulation by means of which the Government seeks to create the most efficient transport system.
3. The general assumptions that Government makes about the availability and price of fuels and other economic factors which influence traffic growth.
4. The objectives of the Government Road Programme.
5. The general methodologies and the adoption of design standards used in the preparation of schemes and orders - as opposed to their application to particular schemes and orders.

6.4 A statement about the relevant Government policies is usually included with the other documentation produced by the Department for Transport or the National Assembly for Wales prior to the opening of an inquiry into an Order published by the Secretary of State / NAW. Representatives of the Government at an inquiry are expected to be able to explain the relevant policies when deemed necessary by the Inspector. They are not required to justify or defend them.

6.5 Objectors may express disagreement with Government policy but there is little point in permitting such disagreement to be pursued in depth. The Inspector's duty is confined to noting the objection and seeing that it does not take up too much inquiry time or distract attention from the main issues. If an objector is determined to pursue objections to general policy beyond reasonable limits he should be advised to submit his views in writing, either to the Inspector, who will enclose the document with his report, or directly to the Secretary of State / NAW.

6.6 Inspectors have to distinguish between those objections which challenge Government policy and those which question the need for the specific proposal. Argument as to whether or not a particular proposal conforms with, or is needed for the implementation of, Government policy is a matter for the inquiry and should be given careful attention by the Inspector.

6.7 The Inspector should ensure that objectors and others are aware of the distinction between the adoption of basic methodology and design standards and their application. The fact that arguments concerning the methodologies and design standards adopted by the Government are out of place at an inquiry does not imply that their application to any particular proposal is immune from being thoroughly tested. Thus, whilst Government or local highway authority witnesses should not be expected to defend or justify national forecasts and general design standards, they are expected to be able to justify their application to the case at issue and to justify their traffic predictions and assignments.

4, [1980] 2 All ER 608

---

Accessibility | Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Site Feedback | Site Map | Planning Portal | Directgov | Gov news | Crown Copyright © 2004

---