1. INTRODUCTION
This presentation is on the merits of Localism bill
(Big society) over the Regional Spatial Strategies
(RSS). It will begin with a brief discussion of the
RSS and then the Localism bill. It will then end
with the summary of main points of argument.

2. REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGIES
• The RSS became operational with the
introduction of planning and compulsory
purchase Act of 2004. It is a major element of
the Labour government agenda for speeding
up planning system and ensuring sustainable
development (Glasson and Marshall, 2007)

3. KEY ISSUES IN RSS
The RSS was enacted to provide a broad
development strategy for a fifteen to twenty year
period and it was targeted to achieve the
following;
• Delivering sustainable economic prosperity and
growth
• Identification of the scale and distribution of
provision for new housing
• Creating sustainable and mixed communities
e.t.c. (Haughton, Allmendiger, Counsell, and
Vigar, 2010)

4. LOCALISM BILL (BIG SOCIETY)
The coalition Government in 2010 abolished the top
down approach to planning (RSS) and introduced what
is called OPEN SOURCE PLANNING SYSTEM or the big
society. In his speech, the prime minister said, “the job
of government is not to run people’s lives, rather to
help people to run their own lives’’ (BBC, 2011).
Local authorities are best placed to plan for
sustainable development that meets the aspirations of
local communities and government wants to see
decision making powers over housing and planning
decentralised to local authorities and communities
(CLG, 2010)

5. RATIONALE FOR ABOLISHING
REGIONAL STRATEGIES
• IT IS EXPENSIVE, COMPLEX AND TIME
CONSUMING – it takes an average of four years
before a final RSS draft could be published. This
created instability and uncertainty for the local
communities. The RSS is also very expensive to
operate. The running of various board leaders
that oversee the revision, implementation and
monitoring of regional strategies at both central
and local level means a lot of financial burden for
the government (HM, 2011)

6. • THE STRATEGIES ADOPTED IN PREPARING IT
ATTRACT A HIGH LEVEL OF PUBLIC
OPPOSITION – practically, the RSS have
created a sort of imbalance in
communities, setting them against growth
proposals generally and housing targets in
particular. The prolonged process in
implementing RSS means that it has failed to
provide the ideal aspiration for communities
and investors (CLG, 2011)

7. WHAT THE LOCALISM BILL INTENDS
TO ACHIEVE (MERITS)
• Increase in infrastructural and affordable
housing delivery
• Empowering local communities
• Increase local control of public finance
• Open up government to public scrutiny

8. CONCLUSION
• Increase people’s confidence in government
• Participatory government where the local
communities have a big say in issues affecting
them
• Efficient services and good leadership
• Adequate utilisation of taxpayers pounds

9. REFERENCES
* Cameron. (2011). Big society is my ‘mission’. Available at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12443396 [ACCESSED] 14/03/11]
* CLG (2010) Decentralisation and the localism Bill, an essential guide; Available at
http://www.communities.gov.uk [ACCESSED] 18/03/11
* Graham Haughton, Philip Allmendinger, David Counsell and Geoff Vigar (2010), The
new Spatial Planning, Routledge
* House of Commons (2011) Abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies: a planning
vacuum; Available at
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmcomloc/517/5
17.pdf [ACCESSED] 14/03/11
* John Glasson and Tim Marshall (2007) ‘Regional Planning’, Routledge