Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Logo
Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Open group | Started - July 2012 | Last activity - Yesterday

Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

Simon Pickstone, modified 9 Years ago.

Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

Advocate Posts: 104 Join Date: 22/04/13 Recent Posts
Does anybody have a view as to whether or not one would be on 'shaky ground' by placing 'employment and skills-type training' on the R123 List and seeking to fund it through CIL receipts? How tenuous is the argument that 'human resources' are a type of infrastructure? Thought/views are welcomed!
Richard Holmes, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

New Member Posts: 13 Join Date: 20/10/11 Recent Posts
My view is that it isn't infrastructure so we have excluded it from CIL and would look to deliver through policy and conditions or S.106.
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

I agree not infrastructure so not CIL. But - if you have a policy and it meets the s106 tests why not use s106?

 

 

Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

I agree with Richard and Gillian.
Simon Pickstone, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

Advocate Posts: 104 Join Date: 22/04/13 Recent Posts
Thanks for your comments everybody :) Why not S106?...well...there is the ambition to minimise it's use...accepting it won't be scrapped alltogether which would make sense since it is forcing us to run two parallel processes for securing developer contributions...and then there is the faf of complying with the 'Pooling Restrictions' (whatever they actually mean!?).
Richard Holmes, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

New Member Posts: 13 Join Date: 20/10/11 Recent Posts
If it's not infrastructure then it's not subject to the pooling restrictions?  In any case, if it meets the three tests there would be no need to pool because the training would only be related to the development and meeting the requirements of just the development itself, so you wouldn't be pooling anything.
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

Simon Pickstone:
Thanks for your comments everybody :) Why not S106?...well...there is the ambition to minimise it's use...accepting it won't be scrapped alltogether which would make sense since it is forcing us to run two parallel processes for securing developer contributions...and then there is the faf of complying with the 'Pooling Restrictions' (whatever they actually mean!?).
Hi Simon, If training is not "infrastructure" then its not caught by the pooling restrictions.


Simon Pickstone, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.

Advocate Posts: 104 Join Date: 22/04/13 Recent Posts
Tony/Richard....both good points...thanks, Simon