Another body blow to democracy!

The Government has made it easier for housebuilding to get the green light through its New Homes Accelerator (NHA). The aim is to increase housebuilding and stimulate economic growth through jobs, investment and spending.

But there is another side to this. Large-scale development, particularly on greenfield land, can destroy countryside, reduce agricultural land and food-production capacity, remove wildlife habitat, affect public rights of way and reduce access to open countryside. It can also increase pressure on drainage, flood risk, infrastructure and the environment.

The NHA increases the political and administrative pressure to get major housing schemes moving, particularly where they have been identified as sites capable of helping deliver the Government’s housing ambitions.

Meanwhile, councils are required to plan for housing need within the framework established by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). They identify sites through their Local Plans, which are independently examined by a Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State.

An adopted Local Plan gives a council an important framework for deciding where development should take place. However, if a council lacks an up-to-date plan or cannot demonstrate an adequate five-year housing land supply, its ability to resist speculative development can be weakened.

Now the Government is changing the balance again.

Elected mayors are being given new powers over certain major planning applications, including developments of more than 150 homes, more than 15,000 square metres of commercial space, or buildings over 30 metres.

The Government says this will speed up decision-making and unlock strategically important development.

But what does this mean for local democracy?

A local council may consider a major development, hear the views of its residents and decide whether it is appropriate for its community. If that decision can then be taken away and determined at mayoral level, how much local control is left?

There may be legitimate arguments for strategic planning where developments affect several communities. But there is also a danger that “strategic importance” becomes a means of taking controversial major developments away from the councils and communities most directly affected by them.

If we accept that we need more homes, but we also need to ask where they should be built, what environmental and social costs they create, and who should have the final say.

The Prime Minister has spoken of devolving power to local communities. Yet taking major planning decisions away from local councils appears to move in the opposite direction.

This isn’t simply about planning. It is about democracy and who gets to decide the future of our communities.

Sources

• https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework
• https://www.gov.uk/guidance/local-plans-the-examination-process-new-style-local-plan-2026-regulations
• https://www.gov.uk/guidance/local-plans-housing-land-supply-evidence-july-2021-framework-as-amended-in-september-2023
• https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-and-economic-land-availability-assessment
• https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-supply-and-delivery
• https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8m0gxexl4o