Where is the National Planning Policy Framework?

Last December, the government started consulting on changes to the National Planning Policy Framework. At the time, it planned to respond to the consultation by spring 2023 and to publish the revised version immediately, so the changes could take effect “as soon as possible”. Longer-term revisions were also due when the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill is ultimately enacted. As we enter autumn 2023, we are still waiting. The delay has had serious consequences for the development industry. Many local plans have been left in limbo, as numerous local planning authorities paused their plan-making, waiting for the lighter-touch policies proposed. So why the delay? The government’s need to work through 26,000 responses? Local by-elections? Party politics? The government has been tight-lipped, except to say that a response will be published only after the Bill becomes law. Some believe this could mean October or November 2023. As for the substance of the proposed reforms, unsurprisingly, housing delivery is a major focus. However, many in the industry believe the proposals will be counterproductive. Not in my backyard? The government wants to make it easier and quicker for councils to make local plans and discourage speculative development, which is more likely to meet local resistance. Its key message, ahead of a general election, is that it will ensure the building of “the right homes in the right places”. The revisions would make it harder to secure planning permission where the council can argue that: (i) meeting an area’s housing needs in full would mean building at densities significantly out of character with the existing area; or (ii) there is clear evidence of past over-delivery. A parliamentary select committee on planning reform has observed that some of the proposed changes, in fact, risk inhibiting overall housebuilding. Is urban and brownfield enough? The government has suggested a 35% uplift in the housing requirement for the top 20 most populated towns and cities; a greater emphasis on brownfield development; and removal of the requirement to review green belt boundaries to meet housing needs. However, brownfield development alone is unlikely to achieve the target of 300,000 net new homes per year, as the parliamentary select committee and other industry experts have pointed out. Brownfield sites may not be in the areas where housing is most needed, and brownfield development carries greater upfront costs, such as remediation works. Alignment… with what? The Bill will abolish local planning authorities’ “duty to cooperate” when making local plans. The duty was designed to encourage authorities to engage with neighbouring authorities and other public bodies on cross-boundary and strategic matters, particularly housing delivery. The government has proposed to replace the duty with a new “alignment policy” but no details have yet been published. The consensus in the industry seems to be that the duty has not proven effective in terms of housing delivery. However, the parliamentary select committee has urged the government not to abolish the duty to cooperate without the new alignment policy being fleshed out. A centralised future? With a lacuna in strategic planning being created by the abolition of the duty to cooperate, perhaps central planning will fill the gap. The Bill will give national planning policies increased importance. National Development Management Policies will be introduced, based on NPPF policies. Planning applications will need to be determined in accordance with NDMPs and local plan policies, with the former trumping the latter if they conflict. Some may argue this is a fundamental shift away from local democracy. At the least, it undermines the purported objective of encouraging local plan-making. There is concern in the industry that NDMPs, which can be promulgated by the secretary of state, will not be subject to proper scrutiny, and will lead to local plans being overridden. This concern has been heightened by Michael Gove’s high-profile intervention in the planning application for the Marks & Spencer store on Oxford Street, W1. A consultation on how NDMPs will be implemented is expected to be launched after the initial NPPF revisions are published. We can expect NDMPs to cover carbon emissions, energy efficiency, repurposing and green belt protection. We are also likely to see details of how NDMPs will be scrutinised, which may reflect some of the process for adopting infrastructure national policy statements. All change? Any discussion of planning reform cannot omit the looming general election. The Conservatives are treading a delicate path between defending their traditional “blue wall” constituents and backbenchers from development and demonstrating to their newer “red wall” constituents that they will boost housebuilding. This caused the government to pull a parliamentary vote on the Bill last November and is likely to be now responsible, at least partly, for the delays to the revised NPPF. Labour has stepped into the breach by selling itself as the party of housebuilding and committing to reverse the government’s planned changes. It has also promised to build on the green belt. With a general election likely to be called next year and Labour consistently ahead in the polls, it would be wise to hedge your bets on the direction of planning reform. Brian Cheung is a senior associate in the planning and environment team at Ashurst