Guidance

Bedford Entertainment Resort Complex: Handling Arrangements

Published 26 June 2025

Applies to England

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (“MHCLG”) Handling Note: for a request to grant planning permission for an Entertainment Resort Complex and associated development at the former Brickworks and adjoining land, Kempston Hardwick, Bedford. First published June 2025.

The Minister of State (Minister for Housing and Planning) has received a request from Universal Destinations and Experiences (“the Promoter”) for him to grant planning permission for an Entertainment Resort Complex and associated development at Kempston Hardwick, Bedfordshire (“the Proposal”).

The Minister has been asked to consider granting planning permission by making a Special Development Order under Section 59 of the Town and County Planning Act 1990.

The development for which planning permission is sought is an EIA development as defined in the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (“EIA Regulations”). The request is accompanied by a statement referred to as an Environmental Statement.

The Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (“DCMS”) as the department responsible for policy relating to the visitor economy and creative industries, and the Office for Investment (“OfI”), as the organisation responsible for attracting investment into the UK, are coordinating within government and supporting the Promoter to work with executive agencies, non-departmental public bodies and interested parties relevant to the Proposal. DCMS and OfI are supported by the Department for Business and Trade (“DBT”). The Department for Transport (“DfT”), as the department responsible for transport infrastructure, is supporting the Promoter with regard to transport options. Certain Ministers and officials within DCMS, OfI, DBT and DfT are, therefore, considered to be supporting the Promoter to bring forward the Proposal for development.

The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (“SSHCLG”) has recused herself from planning decision making in respect of the Proposal given a potential or perceived conflict of interest. The SSHCLG has delegated responsibility as decision maker on planning decisions concerning the Proposal to the Minister of State (Minister for Housing and Planning). All references to the “Planning Minister” are to the Minister of State (Minister for Housing and Planning).

This note sets out the administrative arrangements in place to ensure that the Planning Minister is able to perform his duties, on behalf of the SSHCLG, in an objective manner and without conflicts of interest (including for the purposes of the EIA Regulations).

Regulation 64 of the EIA Regulations provides that:

(1) Where an authority or the Secretary of State has a duty under these Regulations, they must perform that duty in an objective manner and so as not to find themselves in a situation giving rise to a conflict of interest.

(2) Where an authority, or the Secretary of State, is bringing forward a proposal for development and that authority or the Secretary of State, as appropriate, will also be responsible for determining its own proposal, the relevant authority or the Secretary of State must make appropriate administrative arrangements to ensure that there is a functional separation, when performing any duty under these Regulations, between the persons bringing forward a proposal for development and the persons responsible for determining that proposal.

These arrangements are intended to ensure a functional separation between those bringing forward the Proposal and those making planning decisions and their advisors. They also recognise the role of certain personnel within departments, and their associated executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies, in providing advice, (as a statutory consultee) to the Promoter, prior to the submission of any Proposal. These arrangements are consistent with Regulation 64 of the EIA Regulations.

These arrangements make sure that:

• the functions of the planning decision maker are undertaken by a named Minister in MHCLG provided with the necessary advice and acting impartially and objectively

• any person acting or assisting in the handling of the planning decisions in MHCLG is prohibited from being involved in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the planning proposal and/or the development

• any person involved in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the development is prohibited from giving any instructions to, or putting any pressure upon, any person acting or assisting in the handling of the planning decision in MHCLG or attempting to do so

• any person with a role in assisting the Promoter is prohibited from being involved in any statutory consultee response on the merits of any proposal

Planning Propriety

It is essential that the Planning Minister acts, and is seen to act, with complete propriety, particularly where they are taking decisions on whether to grant or refuse planning permission. Acting with complete propriety means:

• decisions on whether to grant planning permission for development must be undertaken in a fair, open, and impartial way

• planning decisions must be reached only on the basis of evidence and considerations which are relevant to the planning merits of the case

• the Planning Minister must approach (and be seen to approach) each decision with an open mind and must not have a predetermined view on a proposal

• the Planning Minister should not make any public or private comments which could give rise to the impression that they have already made their mind up about the planning merits of a proposal

The Department’s Guidance on planning propriety: planning casework decisions was published on 16 December 2021 (“the Propriety Guidance”). The Propriety Guidance is available online. These handling arrangements sit alongside the Propriety Guidance and should therefore be read in conjunction with that Guidance, the content of which is not repeated.

All those within MHCLG involved in planning decision-making on the Proposal are responsible for identifying, considering, and disclosing conflicts of interest as they become aware of them. The Planning Minister is subject to the Ministerial Code and to the Propriety Guidance. Officials are subject to the Civil Service Code, the Department’s Conflict of Interest Policy, relevant professional ethical standards, and the Propriety Guidance. This is vital to avoid any potential conflicts of interest or any perception of conflict and/or that the decision-maker has been influenced by irrelevant considerations.

These handling arrangements make sure that Ministers or officials in DCMS, OfI, DBT and DfT, with any role in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the planning proposal and/or the development (including assisting the Promoter in making a request for planning permission for the development) are explicitly excluded from the planning decision-making process. This includes the SSHCLG given that she has recused herself.  

Only those within MHCLG listed below will have a role in the planning decision-making process to ensure that those within MHCLG, who either previously made public pronouncements, or have formal responsibility for issues that may be relevant to the proposed development, are excluded from the planning decision-making process.

Those within government with responsibility for the planning decisions.

The Minister of State (Minister for Housing and Planning), the “Planning Minister”

The Planning Minister will take the decisions on whether to grant, or not to grant, planning permission for the proposed development.  Advice and submissions on the planning decisions will not be seen by any other Minister. 

The Planning Minister will not be subject to paragraph 1.6 of the Ministerial Code or “collective Ministerial responsibility” in relation to the determination of the request for planning permission (including any matter affecting the discharge of the duties of the Secretary of State as competent authority under the EIA Regulations for the planning decision).

Neither the SSHCLG, nor her Special Advisors, nor other Ministers nor their Special Advisors, will be able to require the Planning Minister or any official working on the planning decision to disclose to them, or any other person, information relating to the proposed development beyond an indication of any timetable for decision making.

No submissions or information to Ministers of other government departments or of MHCLG concerning the promotion of the proposed development should be shared with the Planning Minister or his Private Office or other officials supporting him on this matter. Communications material may be shared with the Planning Minister, and relevant officials advising him, where this is necessary to ensure that references to the Minister’s and MHCLG’s role are factually accurate.

Director General level

The Director General, Regeneration, Housing and Planning (and their office) has not had any involvement in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the proposed development previously and will act as Executive Team representative when needed. The Executive Team, chaired by the Permanent Secretary, is responsible for providing strategic direction and corporate and people leadership across the department. Any official working on the planning decision will not be accountable to the Permanent Secretary or the Executive team in relation to the planning decision. They will be accountable through the Director and Director General to the Planning Minister.

Director and Deputy Director level

The Chief Planner (and their office) has not had any involvement in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the proposed development previously and will oversee the work of officials providing advice to the Planning Minister. Neither the Deputy Director for Project Nectarine nor the Deputy Director for Planning Casework has had any involvement in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the proposed development previously.

The Chief Planner and Deputy Director for Project Nectarine may provide advice on the proposed development to the Planning Minister.

The Deputy Director for Project Nectarine will provide project assurance, as well as assisting Officials in the Planning Response Unit (“PRU”) with the crafting of advice for the Planning Minister. The Deputy Director for Planning Casework will maintain a watching brief, providing staff resource to PRU from the Planning Casework Unit (“PCU”) Corporate Team as required. Either Deputy Director may deputise for the Chief Planner on occasion, for the purposes of resilience and to maintain continuity. The PCU Corporate Team has not had any involvement in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the proposed development previously.

Officials

Officials in PRU will provide advice for the Planning Minister on the proposed development, to inform the Minister’s decision making. Advice concerning the merits of the proposed development will only be shared with other officials within MHCLG who are supporting the Planning Minister on this matter.

PRU will communicate with the Promoter / those assisting the Promoter so that both sides can understand respective processes and timescales. When they received a request to do so (as explained below), PRU provided early pre-proposal advice to the Promoter and / or those assisting the Promoter, prior to the submission of a planning proposal for consideration. Any pre-proposal advice provided to the Promoter and / or those assisting the Promoter does not comprise a decision and was without prejudice to any consideration of the Proposal or review of the Proposal in due course, which will be taken having regard to relevant considerations, in line with statutory and other duties, and will take all relevant representations into account.

Legal advisors

PRU is advised by the Government Legal Department and by Dentons UK and Middle East LLP who will also be advising the Planning Minister. Those providing advice have no role in promoting the proposed development / assisting the Promoter (other than supporting PRU when providing pre-proposal planning advice) and have no conflict of interest in providing any such advice.

The Deputy Director, Planning Team MHCLG Legal Advisers (a division of the Government Legal Department) has no role in promoting the proposed development / assisting the Promoter previously and has no conflict of interest in assisting Dentons UK and Middle East LLP.

Communications

While not involved in the process of reaching a decision, to deal with ongoing press queries and communications, specific Communication colleagues will be identified, and those individuals will be kept separate from promoting or assisting in the promotion of the proposed development which are unconnected with press and communications.

Freedom of Information (“FOI”) and Environmental Information Regulations (“EIR”) Team

Where necessary, FOI/EIR requests relating to information held by the government as decision-maker will be reviewed with the private office officials in the Planning Minister’s office, and in Communications who have not had any role promoting or assisting in the promotion of the proposed development.

MHCLG handling of information

Given MHCLG’s wider responsibilities, including place-based growth strategies, it is recognised that it is not possible for MHCLG Ministers to be entirely detached from or disinterested in the wider work of the Department. When it comes to taking planning decisions on the Proposal, these must be taken only on the facts of the case, the relevant statutory criteria and the planning considerations involved.

Information relating to the consideration of the environmental information and planning merits of the Proposal and decision-making held by MHCLG will not, except with express authority of the Chief Planner, be disclosed or discussed with any person within MHCLG other than the Planning Minister, the Director General, Regeneration, Housing and Planning, the Deputy Director for Project Nectarine, the Deputy Director for Planning Casework, officials in PRU and PCU Corporate Team. Any such authorisation must comply with Regulation 64 of the EIA Regulations (including the requirement to maintain functional separation) and must require any authorised person discussing or receiving such information to comply with that regulation and these handling arrangements. A written record of any express authorisations given by the Chief Planner is to be kept.

Those within government who are to have no role in planning decision-making

Ministers and officials within government with responsibility for acting as coordinator within government on the Proposal or assisting the Promoter with pre-proposal scheme development (other than pre-proposal planning advice or pre-proposal advice as a statutory consultee) will have no role in planning decision-making. Those in other government departments whose function could lead to a potential conflict because they may have had a role in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the development – and so should have no role in planning decision-making (including acting as a statutory consultee on the planning merits of the proposals) - are set out below.  

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

The Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (“DCMS”) is responsible for policy relating to the visitor economy and creative industries and as such DCMS is supporting the Promoter to connect with relevant stakeholders and source relevant information. Those whose function may lead to a potential conflict because they may have had a role in this activity are set out below:

• Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

• Permanent Secretary

• Minister of State for Creative Industries, Arts, and Tourism

• Private Offices for the Secretary of State, Minister of State and Permanent Secretary

• Director General for Strategy and Operations

• Director of Project Delivery and Major Events / Senior Responsible Officer

• Chief Commercial Officer

• Chief Financial Officer

• Director of Analysis and Chief Economist

• Director of Communications

• Deputy Director, Visitor Economy / Project Director

• DCMS Programme Team

Department for Transport

Personnel within the Department for Transport (“DfT”), and its associated arm’s-length bodies, have acted in two respects. First, personnel in road and rail modal teams have provided pre-proposal advice on the road and rail related elements of the Proposal. Second, separate personnel in the Planning Division have been briefed and will act on behalf of DfT in its function as a statutory consultee.

Those whose function within DfT may lead to a potential conflict, because they may have had a role in developing and / or considering transport solutions to support the proposed development, are set out below.

• Secretary of State for Transport

• Private Offices to the Secretary of State and Permanent Secretary

• Permanent Secretary

• Director, Roads Strategy, Road Transport Group

• Deputy Director for Road Investment, Policy and Pipeline Development, Roads Strategy, Road Transport Group

• Team Leader, Strategic Studies, Road Transport Group

• Senior Policy Advisor, Strategic Studies, Road Transport Group

• Director, Rail Infrastructure Central

• Programme Director, MML and East Midlands, Rail Infrastructure Central

• Programme Client, Intercity, Rail Infrastructure Central

• Programme Director, East West Rail, Rail Infrastructure Central

• Head of Policy, East West Rail, Rail Infrastructure Central

• Project Sponsor, East West Rail, Rail Infrastructure Central

• Road and rail modal teams

Office for Investment / Department for Business and Trade

The Office for Investment (“OfI”) has worked with DCMS to assist the Promoter of the Proposal to navigate the UK regulatory and investment landscape and ensure appropriate connections across government and its arms-length bodies. The Department for Business and Trade (“DBT”) has been supporting DCMS and OfI in this activity, as required.

Those whose function within OfI and the DBT may lead to a potential conflict, because they may have had a role in the promotion of the development, are set out below.

• Secretary of State, Department for Business and Trade

• Minister for Investment

• Department for Business and Trade Permanent Secretary (Accounting Officer)

• Private Offices to the Secretary of State and Minister for Investment

• Project officials at the Office for Investment and the Department for Business and Trade

MHCLG is likely to invite representations on the Proposal from other government departments and / or their associated arm’s-length bodies. Where such representations are invited from a consultation body as defined in Regulation 2(1) of the EIA Regulations (as a “statutory consultee”), those responding will not have had a role in assisting the Promoter. They may have provided pre-proposal advice. That is to say, there will be a separation between those in government asked to respond on the scheme’s merits as a statutory consultee, and those who may choose to respond in any other capacity. Any person involved in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the development is prohibited from giving any instructions to, or putting any pressure upon, any person responding to the Proposal as a statutory consultee. This also applies to the SSHCLG given that she has recused herself.

For the avoidance of doubt, regardless of whether Ministers and officials have or have not assisted the Promoter, only those listed above as ‘those within government with responsibility for the planning decisions’ will have sight of any submissions or other advice on the planning decisions.

Detailed handling arrangements

There is a risk that should the Planning Minister attend a meeting alongside Ministers from Departments with a role in coordinating within government and supporting the Promoter to work with stakeholders relevant to the development, this could be contrary to paragraphs 20 to 23 of the Propriety Guidance (e.g. privately made representations on the planning proposal may be heard and this may give the impression of bias). To reduce the risk of the impression of bias the following arrangements will apply.

• The Planning Minister does not attend meetings where the Proposal is to be discussed with the government departments set out immediately above or any other person involved in promoting or assisting in the promotion of the planning proposal and/or the development.

• Attendance by the Planning Minister at meetings with other government departments or ministers is limited to other areas of MHCLG policy, or where discussions relate more widely to planning policy matters that may be relevant to the Proposals (rather than site or proposal specific issues). If the Proposal arises as an issue or topic of discussion, the Planning Minister and relevant officials will recuse themselves from the meeting.

• Other MHCLG Ministers attending such meetings will expressly state that the Department’s role as planning decision maker means that the Proposal cannot be discussed by that Minister at the relevant meeting.

In order to make sure the separation of officials advising the Planning Minister, set out above, is maintained the following actions will be taken.

• This note is circulated to everyone working on the planning decision and anyone else who needs to see it, and a clear instruction e-mail issued to PRU, and other staff involved on handling / propriety. The note may be recirculated, as necessary, following updates.

• Clearly mark who can and cannot be allowed to see the document in question on all submissions / e-mails. etc related to the planning decisions. For example: Universal Bedford no other Ministers and officials must see this. Those within government receiving emails will be restricted using the Department’s Data Loss Prevention (“DLP”) Microsoft feature. This allows documents and emails to be classified as ‘recipient only’ in line with Government Security Classification Policy.

• Make sure that material related to the planning merits of the proposed development is not stored on shared file spaces accessible by those outside of the decision-making chain.

• Report to the Chief Planner on propriety and handling at key stages of the decision-making / on request.

Pre-proposal advice

The government’s National Planning Policy Framework (“the Framework”) and Planning Practice Guidance (“PPG”) highlight the purpose and benefits of pre-application advice when provided by a local planning authority and statutory consultees to prospective applicants for planning permission. Such early engagement has significant potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning system for all parties. The Framework notes that the right information is crucial to good decision-making, particularly where formal assessments are required (such as Environmental Impact Assessment, Habitats Regulations assessment and flood risk assessment). To avoid delay, applicants should discuss what information is needed with the local planning authority and expert bodies as early as possible.

PRU, when it has received a request to do so, has provided pre-proposal advice to the Promoter and to those assisting the Promoter, prior to the submission of a formal planning proposal for consideration.

PRU is clear in its communications that the pre-proposal advice it provides is not comprising a formal decision and is without prejudice to any consideration of a proposal or review of a proposal in due course, which would be taken having regard to all material considerations. It is also made clear to those who seek advice that for reasons of planning propriety, PRU is prohibited from discussing the merits of the proposed development.

Where PRU needs to communicate at the pre-proposal stage with statutory bodies with a particular knowledge of, or involvement in, matters relevant to the Proposal, it is making sure in its communications that PRU’s role is understood by the relevant parties.

26 June 2025