CONSULTATION RESPONSE: Reforms to Planning Policy consultation

Context

These reforms were proposed in response to backbench concerns around housing targets. Housing Forum members come from across the housing sector and represent both local planning authorities and those who encounter the planning system and applicants – housebuilders, housing associations and planning consultants. Their views naturally differ on the issue of planning reform – though they do share a commitment to our mission of ‘A Quality Home for All’. The consultation response has been drawn together with input from members to give an overview of the issues we believe are most paramount in the proposed reforms and in line with our aspiration of increasing housing supply (including affordable housing) and improving housing quality.

The Housing Forum consultation response:

We believe that the Government is right to see housing as part of the growth agenda, and with a role to play in Levelling Up. Planning is at the heart of this process and at the moment it does not have the resources needed to support sustainable development. A better funded and resourced planning system would give developers the certainty they need over timescales and investment and so help in both Levelling Up and driving growth across all regions.

The main points we urge government to consider when it takes forward this bill are:

• We welcome the Government’s recommitment to building 300,000 homes a year by the mid 2020s. However, we are concerned that the changes proposed do not match up to this aspiration because they downgrade the importance of boosting the supply of housing.
• The cumulative impact of removing 5 year housing targets, removing the buffer of allocating more land for housing than the target, and giving more legitimate reasons for not adopting housing requirements as targets is likely to be a reduction in housing supply. This could not come at a worse time when the housing crisis is leaving so many people unable to afford a decent home, and the housing sector grapples with economic downturn and strained finances.
• We recognise the value of urban uplift, though think that the way it has been drawn up is simplistic and more recognition of wider areas is needed.
• We welcome the increased weight proposed for social rented housing and would like to see local authorities given more discretion over the tenure mix that is needed in their area, recognising that this may entail additional funding.
• We understand the motivation behind the proposition to take an applicant’s past behaviour into account when granting planning permission but consider that this would be at odds with the ”long-standing principle that planning decisions should be based on the planning merits of the proposed development – and not the applicant.”  We also think that implementing this could prove impractical and worsen conflict over the causes of delays.
• We welcome beautiful housing, but are concerned that the inherent subjectivity of the term beauty makes it ill-suited to policy and approaches centered on well-designed housing and placemaking are likely to work better.
• We support moves to simplify the planning system and reduce the workload on local authorities in producing local plans and NDMPs which should reduce uncertainty. These need to strike the right balance between local control and simplification.
• The consultation asks if the proposals meet equalities duties to advance equality of opportunities. Our overrising concern with the proposed changes to the Framework are that they will reduce the amount of new housing and also of affordable housing that is built. This is likely to impact disproportionately on young adults who are not yet homeowners or have not managed to access social housing.

We hope that the Government considers our input into its consultation, as well as all the other responses that we are aware have been submitted across the housing sector. We look forward to working further with policy makers on tacking the housing crisis and ensuring that the 300,000 homes a year that are needed are delivered to ensure our mission of ‘a quality home for all’.

You can read our full response here.