Will planning become a free for all?

With a government enjoying a substantial majority for the first time in a decade, what are the prospects for planning policy? The Queen’s Speech identified the need for reform, making the planning process “clearer and more accessible for all users”. Alongside that came talk about extending permitted development rights and permission “in principle”. So some professionals and commentators have expressed concerns that we may be about to witness a planning free for all. To understand what will underline policy, it’s important to look at the bigger picture. No more business as usual First, don’t underestimate No. 10’s determination to deliver tangible change, not least for the communities that have previously felt overlooked. Whether it’s decaying town centres or ageing housing estates, there is now a strong belief that ‘business as usual’ simply won’t do. The PM knows his job depends on it, but to be fair, he also strongly believes that a new, more radical and ambitious approach is needed. Second, there is a recognition that Whitehall cannot direct this change. It has to empower communities. So the devolving of powers from the centre will be integral to change. What ‘levelling up’ means These drivers will shape housing and planning policy, both in the scale and the manner of the change. The phrase ‘levelling up’ is therefore both about improving an area’s economic prospects and a community’s ability to determine its future. That’s why, alongside permitted development rights, there is also a strong commitment to improving the quality of what is built, and giving local people the chance to decide their own design standards. Some may argue that if you give the public more powers, then anti-development activists will use the powers to cause more delay. This can happen, of course – but often what rouses many people is the sense that they have no say over what happens locally and, in particular, what a planned development will look like. If a locally elected planning authority can adopt a broad design code for their area, which reflects the local architectural vernacular, then it will create much greater clarity for both the public and developers. This is not to say that some planning rules won’t be scrapped or overhauled. For example, use class orders are ridiculously over-complex and need to be modernised urgently.  Indeed, high streets not only need to change, but need to be able to continue to adapt in the years to come. We may need a simplified planning zone for town centres, to create the right incentive to trigger the investment needed. A practical approach? Put simply, what’s emerging is a more practical approach to planning, which understands the benefit of open, competitive markets and the value of targeted interventions from government.  Witness the joint work between the Ministry and the Royal Town Planning Institute to strengthen planning enforcement, through promoting best practice. Nothing undermines public confidence more in the planning system than when illegal development persists. Clearly an effective planning system also needs more resources. The £22m Planning Delivery Fund is a good start, though personally I think planning resources are spread too thinly across too many small planning authorities. They can neither recruit nor retain the people they need, and the result is that the whole development process is slower. So while many headlines may well be about deregulation, I suspect the balance of changes will be about making the system work, for developers and the public alike. Mark Prisk is a former MP and housing minister