The Crisis in UK Town Planning: A Call for Accountability

I read this morning an excellent piece in Planning Magazine It talks about the hypocrisy of Michael Gove having (yet another) pop at LPA's failing to meet their targets.

Today, on the day of the election I see news outlets are unable to talk about politics. Though I'm pleased to say I can.

In December, Housing Secretary Michael Gove admonished local authorities that had failed to adopt a local plan, warning seven councils of impending central government intervention. In a speech to the Royal Institute of British Architects, Gove declared, “There is no greater failure than the failure to actually have a plan in place.”

He even threatened to get “medieval” with uncooperative councils.

However, Gove’s concerns come against a backdrop of record lows in plan-making, with dozens of authorities halting their plans and only 11 submitting draft documents for examination last year. The crux of the issue lies not only with local authorities but also with the government’s own track record in developing planning policy. The government’s own policy changes have, quite obviously significantly contributed to the current local plan situation.

The Government’s Role in the Planning Mess

The past few years have seen the government introduce a slew of policy changes, from the 2017 housing white paper and the 2020 Planning for the Future White Paper to the 2023 Levelling Up and Regeneration Act. However, these reforms, often creating uncertainty and hiatus while in progress, have generally been slow and overlapping, with changes rarely finalised before the next wave of reforms is proposed.

Examining the policy journey of five major planning initiatives brought forward in recent years, a clear pattern of delay and mismanagement emerges. Last week, Planning highlighted how the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities’ (DLUHC) failure to follow through on threats to intervene in plan-making has allowed some authorities to bypass the need for a plan. However, the more fundamental barriers lie in the government’s own delays and lack of coordination in planning policy development.

A Chronicle of Delay: Five Major Planning Initiatives

1. National Development Management Policies (NDMPs)

Proposed in the August 2020 Planning for the Future White Paper, NDMPs were intended to be ready by mid/late 2022 to allow new-style local plans to be adopted before the end of the parliament. Almost four years later, the NDMPs remain incomplete.

2. Infrastructure Levy (IL)

Also proposed in the 2020 white paper, the IL aimed to replace the existing section 106 and community infrastructure levy system of developer contributions. Despite initial promises for timely implementation, the IL has not been rolled out in full and might take up to a decade.

3. Environmental Outcomes Reports (EORs)

First proposed in the 2020 white paper and then incorporated into the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill in May 2022, EORs were meant to streamline environmental impact assessments. However, they are still not fully implemented, with necessary secondary legislation only expected from 2025.

4. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Revisions

Announced in May 2022, the revisions to the NPPF were subject to significant delays, with consultations and government responses lagging behind schedule. Ultimately, the revisions were not finalized until December 2023.

5. Local Authority Planning Fee Increases

Proposed in May 2022, the planning fee increases were only implemented in December 2023, despite earlier promises to alleviate local government financial strains quickly.

It is no wonder we have staff leaving the public sector in droves....

The Toll of Policy Uncertainty

The cumulative delays from these five policies amount to nearly seven years beyond the original timetables. This pattern of consistent delay in policy development and implementation has created an environment of uncertainty and stasis in the planning system.

Commentators attribute these delays to various factors, including the government’s diverted attention due to the Covid crisis, rapid turnover of ministers , reduced civil service capacity, and the increasing complexity of introducing reforms. Mary Cook, partner at planning law firm Town Legal, highlights that “the ability to implement policy even when it exists is hamstrung” by these delays.

Impact on Local Plan Production

The impact of this policy uncertainty is most evident in the drop-off in local plan production. From late 2021, as the DLUHC began to retract from the reforms outlined in the Planning for the Future White Paper, local planning authorities (LPAs) started to halt plan-making. The trend accelerated after the December 2022 NPPF consultation, leading to a significant hiatus in local plan work.

By late 2023, the number of LPAs with up-to-date plans had dropped 30 per cent from its 2019 peak to just 132. Nicola Gooch partner at law firm Irwin Mitchell, noted that the NPPF consultation caused a “ridiculous number of plans [to be] paused,” exacerbating the local plan hiatus.

The Government’s Hypocrisy

Central to this issue is the hypocrisy of central government, which criticises councils for their lack of timeliness while being the primary cause of delays. Hugh. Ellis , policy director at the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA), asserts that “the single biggest reason for delay in local plans is national government.”

The erratic approach of the DLUHC to policy formation, characterised by inconsistent consultation responses and unpredictable policy announcements, further aggravates the situation.

This erratic approach undermines the stability and predictability necessary for effective local plan-making.

Lessons for Future Governments

The current planning crisis in the UK calls for a more selective and coherent approach to planning policy changes from future governments.

Consistency in government policy, clear direction, and timely implementation are crucial to unlocking the planning system and achieving housing targets.

The next government must avoid the pitfalls of the past, focusing on delivering policies efficiently and coherently. Only then can the planning system be revitalised to meet the needs of communities and support sustainable development.

In conclusion, while the planning system has been an easy target for under investment and blame, the current government’s track record reveals a deeper issue of mismanagement and policy inconsistency. For the sake of future development, a renewed focus on stability and efficiency in planning policy is essential.

#michaelgove #planning #planningsystem #planningreform