Believe it when you see it was the attitude of many City economists to Labour’s promised overhaul of the planning regime.
Successive Conservative governments tried to reform the planning regime, with little success. Planning applications, housing starts, housing completions are all heading lower.
As Reeves herself noted in her first speech as Chancellor, “planning reform has become a byword for political timidity in the face of vested interests and a graveyard of economic ambition.”
But within days of the new government taking office, it seems meaningful progress has been made. With the stroke of a pen, the de facto ban on new onshore wind turbines has been removed.
“Never will the deletion of a footnote have made more difference to the delivery of renewable energy,” Catherine Howard, partner at Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF), told City A.M.
Reeves also announced modest changes to the planning regime which she hopes will help the new Labour government meet its ambitious target to build 1.5m homes over the course of the next parliament.
By the end of the month Labour will have restored mandatory local housing targets, ditched by the Conservatives in 2022.
Local councils will also be told to review the greenbelt, finding potential ‘grey-belt’ land that could be used for housing developments. A recent report suggested that building on previously developed green belt land could lead to 74,000 homes a year.
Martyn Jarvis, senior associate at HSF told City A.M. the re-introduction of mandatory targets was “not radical,” but found more encouragement in the proposed changes to the green belt given its political sensitivity.
However, he said a more radical re-evaluation of the green belt would likely be needed to help deliver on the housebuilding targets.
“There appears to be a general recognition that…more needs to be done to identify suitable land for housing and to meet the mandatory targets,” he said.
Beyond the changes to policy, the most important change is a change in attitude.
In her speech today, Reeves suggested that Angela Rayner, the deputy Prime Minister who will oversee much of Labour’s housebuilding agenda, will be a much more willing user of call-in powers than her predecessors.
Those call-in powers always existed, the Conservatives were just unwilling to use them because of the emphasis they put on localism in their own development plans.
Rayner has already called-in planning decisions for data centres in Buckinghamshire and in Hertfordshire.
There’s likely more to come. “When she (Rayner) intervenes in the economic planning system, the benefit of development will be a central consideration and that she will not hesitate to review an application where the potential gain for the regional and national economies warrant it,” Reeves said.
Howard said this was a positive step despite the implications for local democracy. “If Labour is serious about a delivering 1.5m homes in the next five years it will need to use this power,” she said.
“Once a string of call-ins have been made, positive precedents will be set which should then be followed by local councils and the Planning Inspectorate when considering other housing applications and appeals,” she added.
There’s likely to be more fights ahead, particularly over the greenbelt. Speaking on the Today Programme, Zack Simons, a barrister at Landmark Chambers, said the planning framework should be changed to enable construction on the greenbelt to reflect the needs created by the housing crisis.
“The framework should confirm…that the needs generated by our profound housing crisis can – not always – but can outweigh harm to the green belt to justify new housing development,” he said. This could prove very unpopular politically.
Charlie Reid, planning partner at law firm Ashurst pointed to the more practical constraints on housebuilding beyond the planning system.
“The government needs to achieve delivery not just planning policy reform,” he said. “For houses to be built much will depend on wider industry initiatives such as public-private collaboration and boosting construction skills.”
So definitely a positive start, but its likely only a start.
