Latest

Labour's Planning Reforms – A step backwards

Peter Latham

Preserving the green belt Photo by Colin Smith
Preserving the green belt Photo by Colin Smith

The Labour Government has already hobbled itself by keeping the Conservatives' fiscal rules on public spending. Worse, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have claimed for months that the planning system gets in the way of the growth on which they have pinned their economic strategy.

Like the Tories before them, they forget that the purpose of the planning system, successfully implemented by the 1945 Labour Government, is to enable development, including building work and changes of land use, to be carried out in the right place and at a suitable scale, taking into account relevant local conditions. Today most planning applications receive permission from local councils. Most refusals are upheld on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate, disappointing those whose schemes are turned down. This indicates that overall the system works pretty well at local council level, despite circumstances. It still has the tacit support of many housebuilders, because the housing permissions, whether implemented or not, keep up the value of land to their advantage.

So what is meant by the allegation that “planning causes delays”?

PLANNING DELAYS

The planning applications system is now very cumbersome, not least because of the extra duties heaped upon planning professionals in recent decades. Good design, for instance, was once a low priority. Now it is a national requirement, introducing design assessment processes that take time to do. Mixed use schemes with shops, offices, bars and flats are encouraged by development plans, but the extra complexity means there are more conflicts to iron out before approval, not helped by the Licensing Act of 2003, allowing bars to open late close to residential buildings. Flood Risk became a big issue after the floods of autumn 2000. Local planners were given the job of implementing the specialist requirements of the Environment Agency, who became a statutory consultee meaning they cannot be ignored. Questions of land contamination need more staff time, with more brownfield land being redeveloped than before.

All these things, and more, lengthen the assessment of developments without much increase in planning staff, and in many cases a reduction.

PRIVATISATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS

A bigger change, however, was the attempt to bring nationally significant infrastructure projects under proper control. Such schemes include power stations, large renewable energy plants, airports, major roads, large sewerage schemes etc. At first, these schemes were assessed under Labour's Infrastructure Planning Commission established by the Planning Act (2008). Later, the Conservatives' Localism Act (2011) transferred the approval regime to the Planning Inspectorate. It is a distinct arrangement, separate from the local authority system of town and country planning.

The snag is that private firms, albeit with much government funding, might have the initiative in building these schemes, or not. If their shareholders want their 10 or 15% return, depending on conditions, they may choose to invest abroad rather than plod through a system increasingly beset by delays, as has become the case. The public interest, the entire purpose of the system, is the loser.

Notes

  1. 1.
    was a watershed year. Before then, the state took a leading part in carrying out development. Local authorities built their own council houses on land allocated for them in the development plan. Early comprehensive redevelopment of old, poor housing was planned and designed by councils by departmental discussions in town and county halls, in accordance with current thinking. The Ministry of Housing and Local Government led councils in experimental public housing design to Parker Morris standards that often broke new ground. Town centres were designed and rebuilt as part of normal work by local councils, making new provision for ring roads that allowed shopping streets to be pedestrianised, mostly with attractive results compared with previously. Councils would submit applications to themselves under a procedure known as council's own development, governed by regulation.

Copyright Socialist Correspondent 2025

Site by if.works