The Housing Secretary, Angela Rayner, has published a working paper which seeks industry views on proposed changes to the planning system that will give local authority planning officers the power to approve development proposals without referring to committees, where the plans comply with locally agreed plans and national regulations on standards. It also seeks to streamline the committee process and equip members with the tools they need to make robust decisions.
The status of the paper is unusual – it is not a formal consultation, responses may influence the proposed Planning and Infrastructure Bill next year, and there is no deadline by which to respond.
The proposals will be of interest to both developers and local authorities. Whilst applicable to all types of development, it is clear from her media activities that Rayner is targeting housebuilding, which she has recognised is significant national infrastructure.
Policy-compliant development can get held up in the committee system, often as a result of the inherent tension faced by members, who on the one hand are elected to represent their constituents and on the other are being required to perform a quasi-legal function. The proposal to introduce mandatory member training is welcomed, but this alone will not resolve the tension.
The proposals place huge reliance on local plans which historically many local authorities have struggled to keep up to date. The current statutory process requires multiple rounds of consultation, examination, rewrites and approvals, which reach far beyond the standard electoral cycle. A lack of strategic planners in local authorities compounds the issue, particularly when resources have historically been focussed on development management. There is also the risk that this will simply bring forward objections and challenges to the plan-making stage, with local authorities left in limbo whilst the examination process and judicial challenges are concluded. We suggest that the Government will need to streamline the plan-making process to assist local authorities in meeting this goal.
It will take a brave officer to approve a controversial major development proposal without recourse to members, particularly because determining whether something is “policy compliant” often involves the application of judgement. It is not clear what checks and balances will be in place to ensure that officers arrive at reasonable decisions and are suitably protected from any potential backlash which may result. The removal of local people, communities and members from certain planning decisions leads to bigger questions about the impact on democracy at a local level, although it may be argued that the Government’s devolution plans will seek to address this.
Finally, whilst the intention to speed up the planning process is laudable, there remains a significant resourcing issue in the construction industry. The Home Builders Federation warns that for every 10,000 homes planned, 30,000 people will be needed across various specialisms including the full range of trades people, technical, management and professional staff. Currently, the industry is far from being able to provide that at a level which would deliver 1.5 million homes in four years.
We would encourage you to read the paper and take the opportunity to help shape the future of the committee system.
