Come back King Solomon- Wisdom needed

This week will see the publication of the Government's long anticipated National Planning Policy Framework.
This has already been the subject of a 'phoney war' carried out between Developers and Conservationists in an increasingly shrill way mostly in the media.
Most of those genuinely interested in rural areas will have, I suspect, the same broad aims. These include allowing businesses that are responsible for providing jobs and looking after the landscape in rural areas to prosper. This means allowing justified expansion of premises; the use of cars (which will soon be carbon neutral) and the construction of sufficient housing for those working in such businesses to live locally. It also includes however the protection of our most valuable habitats,biodiversity and landscape- whether designated or not; preserving the setting of historic buildings and monuments; ensuring that 'brownfield' land has been looked at first before 'greenfield' and creating sensibly designed housing developments that do not 'concrete over the countryside'.
At the best of times it is difficult to reconcile these aims. When fossilisation of the countryside is advocated by rich bankers seeking to protect the view from and value of their second home or the need for critical mass and therefore large scale housing is argued on viability grounds by developers who can bemuse local planners with their financial calculations, we need an arbitrator.
Traditionally the balance has been provided by planning policy both national and local. The local, in the form of Development Plans, takes into account the national, in the form of Planning Policy Guidance.
The question therefore is will there be sufficient guidance to provide some future certainty for those on either side of the debate? However much of a fan you are of 'localism' it is essential to have consistency around the Country.
One problem, identified by many, is the lack of a definition of sustainable development.If you are going to have a presumption in favour of something you need to know what it is.The widely used 'development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs' doesn't really help us come up with answers in a particular case. What is a 'need? What does 'compromise' mean? The Government's 5 guiding principles from 2005 are ambitious but imprecise.
The laudable aim of reducing unnecessary beaucracy may leave scope for continuing argument which could end up with horse-trading or in the Courts. This won't speed the process up. Let's hope that the megaphone diplomacy of recent months will have resulted in a sensible document this week. If not we will need King Solomon back to adjudicate on every planning application in the country.