Tremorous but not seismic

Written by Harry Gilham, Senior Associate Director.

Finally released last week, The Planning and Infrastructure Bill has a second Parliamentary reading on 24 March, but will it deliver the much vaunted  ‘seismic’ reform for the built environment sector and trigger a housebuilding and infrastructure building boom? 

Notably, it introduces:

• National Scheme of Delegation – Exact details are to be finalised, but it’s expected that applications aligned with local plans and housebuilding schemes under 100 units will be delegated to planning officials, with only the biggest and most controversial applications going to committee.
• Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs) – Allowing developers to bypass certain environmental assessments in exchange for voluntary contributions.
• Planning fees – Empowering local planning authorities to set their own fees. In theory leading to better funded planning departments, though there is always a risk this money will simply go towards subsidising social care and paying off debts.
• Modern planning committees – Mandatory training for planning committee members and reducing the size of planning committees. Though this merely formalises existing expectations for councillors sitting on planning committees.
• Judicial Review restrictions – Limiting legal challenges that slow down major projects.
• Grid Connection Queue Reform – Replacing Ofgem’s ‘first-come, first-served’ model with a prioritisation system.
• Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) Reforms – modernizing how land is acquired for public infrastructure projects with the aim of reducing costs and delays.
• Zonal Energy Pricing – Households within 500 meters of energy infrastructure will receive a £250 discount on annual energy bills.

Delegating decision making to planning professionals away from elected representatives will be welcomed by many in the industry but falls short of the previous Conservative Government’s more radical zoning plans.  The majority of smaller applications that the Bill will delegate to planning officers are usually already approved by planning committees. It is the bigger, more controversial applications that are more frequently refused by committees.

A planning committee reform consultation earlier this year indicated that housebuilding projects already allocated to local plans would be waved through under a national scheme of delegation. This will speed up a lot of development projects, while disincentivising more speculative developments outside of local plans. This part of the Bill promises to be the most controversial, already attracting criticism from the Local Government Association, the County Councils and District Councils Networks over the reduced role of councils within the decision-making process.

The Bill should be passed comfortably by a majority of Labour MPs elected on a promise to build more homes, though the Government may face opposition from the many former councillors in its ranks resistant to delegating powers away from local representatives. On the other hand, the Government will also have to manage calls from some high-profile backbenchers demanding more radical reforms. Chris Curtis, Milton Keynes North MP and Co-Chair of the Labour Growth Group and prominent Labour YIMBY, wrote an article in The Times on 10 March encouraging the Government to go further. He said, “The Government cannot afford half-measures. It must be bold, cut through the red tape, and deliver the infrastructure and homes this country needs.” As ever, adroit party management will be essential to facilitating the passage of planning reforms.

Meanwhile, we can expect opposition parties to take full advantage of the perception of Government reforms disempowering elected councillors in the build-up to May’s local elections.

Labour have also repeatedly reiterated the need to broaden and deliver good community engagement, so developers should not interpret this bill to remove that need.

The bill may not be as radical as many first thought, but seen alongside other reforms, such as changes to the National Planning Policy Framework, the return of onshore wind and hiring more planning officers – the tremors may well shake things up just enough to work.

There is still a narrow window of opportunity for the industry to engage and mobilise policymakers to champion improvements which will shape the planning landscape for years to come.