The ACS and the BRC haven’t exactly seen eye to eye on a great deal recently. But today’s warmly received publication of the National Planning Policy Framework has bought an air of harmony to the world of British retail with both welcoming the news that the NPPF had strengthened its Town Centre First credentials.

The draft NPPF policy, with its rampant “Just Say Yes” approach, worried TCF campaigners who were concerned that the stripped down NPPF, which condensed thousands of pages into just 59, could even weaken their position. But in the final shake-up the overall pro-growth message has been toned down.

The order to give a default Yes to every application has been ditched altogether. And for the ACS, the BRC and others, it’s not just what has been deleted that counts, but also what has been added.

New text instructs planning authorities to promote “diverse” and “individual” town centres. Previously woolly instructions politely asking planners to “prefer” town centres as locations for new developments have been changed to orders that “require” them to do so.

Meanwhile, if any applications for developments are deemed to have possible negative consequences for town centres within a decade, planners are told in no uncertain terms to refuse them altogether.

This afternoon, the retail industry seemed cheerfully stunned that the government had actually been listening. General reaction to early viewings of the policy was positive. At one stage both ‘Greg Clark’ and ‘National Planning Policy Framework’ were incongruously trending worldwide on Twitter, before everyone got distracted by George Osborne’s revelation that he couldn’t remember the last time he had bought a Greggs pasty.

But not everyone got carried away by the tough talking NPPF. Some observers sagely pointed out that policy doesn’t always translate into practice. And while the ACS welcomed the news it was also quick to move on to the next challenge - ensuring the new policy is enforced at local level.

However, for the time being the ACS can be satisfied that at least local planners now have unequivocal guidance as to what they should be doing. Whether they actually follow that guidance or not remains to be seen .

Topics