Planning a clearer path
As the Labour Government continues to enact relentless change across a wide spectrum of policy areas, nowhere has this process been more rapid than in the area of Planning policy. Since the General Election we have already seen the reintroduction of mandatory housing targets, a new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which reversed many of the measures introduced under the previous Conservative administration and we now have the Planning & Infrastructure Bill which was presented to the House of Commons on 11 March.
With the Government claiming to be committed to a laser-like focus on economic growth there is a clear realisation in Whitehall that the liberalisation of the Planning regime is crucial in achieving this goal especially as it is buffeted by the adverse economic consequences of global conflicts and the Trump tariffs. So the questions are will the Planning & Infrastructure Bill deliver economic growth and how will it impact on local government?
As with the ongoing reorganisation of English local government, the Bill largely provides for a much greater emphasis on strategic decision-making at the expense of localism. The most obvious exception to this principle within the Bill is the measure to sub-delegate the setting of planning fees to local planning authorities. However, although this is perhaps the one token devolutionary measure, there is an expectation from Government that Councils will use the additional income generated by these fees to ensure that under-funded Planning departments are properly resourced to enable the delivery of an efficient Planning service. Aside from this component, much of the Bill can be viewed as instinctively interventionist.
The proposed introduction of a national scheme of delegation for planning applications has the potential to significantly speed up the Planning process and will be cheered by many operating in the built environment sector. It remains to be seen where the threshold will be set around the size of planning applications which will still be determined by Planning Committees but any attempt by the Government to limit the powers of Committees to determine some controversial applications will undoubtedly result in some anger from local government. The Bill includes additional measures to reform Planning Committees in reducing the size of some sprawling Committees consisting of dozens of councillors and ensuring that those councillors who continue to serve on Planning Committees are properly trained on national best practice. Overall, these changes seek to increase the consistency of Planning Committees and over time are likely to create greater uniformity in decision-making.
As we move towards a comprehensive system of Combined Authorities and Unitary councils and away from a complex patchwork structure of local government, it is no surprise that the Government uses the Bill to introduce Spatial Development Strategies which are designed to underpin widespread strategic planning. The Spatial Development Strategies will be modelled on the existing London Planning system and are designed to deliver cross-border development. The Bill makes it clear that these Spatial Development Strategies will coexist with Local Plans and Neighbourhood Plans which will continue however it is hard not to conclude that the Bill represents the latest attempt to move Planning policy in a less parochial direction.
In a measure which may presage the imminent announcement of chosen sites identified by the New Towns Taskforce, the Bill also includes measures which increase the powers and flexibility of Development Corporations. This announcement alongside the removal of hope value as part of the Compulsory Purchase Process are clearly designed to help accelerate the delivery of new affordable housing at a rapid rate. Such policies are undoubtedly required if the Government is even going to get close to its highly ambitious target of delivering 1.5 million new homes by the end of this Parliament. However, there is general consensus that the Government may have to go even further through additional revisions to the NPPF in order to meet this target.
Other aspects of the Bill address the fast-tracking the construction of much-needed national infrastructure from large-scale Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects like power stations and railway lines through to highways upgrades and new pylon networks. As ever with infrastructure, the measure of success will come through delivery and it will require more than legislation but also sustained political will from the Government to ensure that the UK’s lamentable recent track record of delivering infrastructure projects is reversed.
What is certain is that we are now on a clearer path when it comes to Planning and Infrastructure delivery. The future appears more strategic and less localist. This will undoubtedly concern many but given the Government’s need to charge the engines of economic growth to guard against global uncertainty, there is little prospect of a reverse from this course.
