Select committee inquiry
Consultation on National Planning Policy inquiry
Closed
What the inquiry looked at
“The Communities and Local Government Committee holds an inquiry into the timing and content of the Government's consultation on national planning policy.”
The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.
What the government said
The government responded on 10 February 2017.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.
The Government has responded to the Committee's report alongside the Housing White Paper, agreeing with some recommendations and disagreeing with others, and says it will issue a revised and updated Framework following responses to the White Paper and relevant consultations.
- On consultation process, the Government does not agree that separate phases on principle and wording should become standard practice, as that "would often be unnecessary and bring unacceptable delay", but will keep Parliament informed of intended actions and, "wherever practicable", their timings.
- On small sites, the Government says it "will not extend the presumption to cover small sites adjacent to settlements", while introducing a presumption in favour of small sites. It does not think it "practicable" to link construction industry numbers to its small sites policy, as other factors affect the industry.
- On Local Plans, the Government "agrees that the requirement to have an up-to-date plan in place should not be in doubt" and says it "intends to mandate in regulations" that authorities review their plans at least once every five years.
- On starter homes, the Government says it has listened to concerns and is consulting on a policy expectation of a minimum of 10% affordable home ownership units rather than a statutory 20% requirement, and is "proposing" a 15 year restricted period. On commuter hubs, it has "decided that it should not define the term".
Read the government's response ↗ Read the report ↗ Report an error
How the inquiry ran
Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from the inquiry's opening on 9 December 2015 to its close on 24 April 2017.
- Oral evidence 2 sessions
- Report 1 Apr 2016
- Government response 10 Feb 2017
- Correspondence 2 letters
What it recommended 12 recommendations · 23 conclusions
1We acknowledge that changes to policy are necessarily accompanied by a degree of uncertainty.
Concluded (the committee's words)
We acknowledge that changes to policy are necessarily accompanied by a degree of uncertainty. Such uncertainty can be mitigated by the provision of clear timescales for the changes, and the process which will be followed. We believe that provisional and indicative timescales and anticipated interactions with other relevant programmes of work should be published alongside all consultations when they are launched, if possible, in order to provide clarity for stakeholders about the process.
2As a priority the Department should publish clear timescales for the next steps for this...
Recommended (the committee's words)
As a priority the Department should publish clear timescales for the next steps for this consultation, including timescales for the Government’s response, implementation, and suitable transitional arrangements. If the changes to the National Planning Policy Framework are delayed beyond summer 2016, we expect the Minister to write to us to explain the reasons and provide updated timescales.
3As a matter of principle, we believe that when changes are made to the wording...
Concluded (the committee's words)
As a matter of principle, we believe that when changes are made to the wording of a key policy framework such as the National Planning Policy Framework, there should be a two-stage consultation process: first on the overall policy, and subsequently on the precise wording which will give effect to the change. If there is no further consultation on the specific wording of the consultation proposals, it is essential that the Department listens carefully to concerns about ambiguity or lack of clarity in the revised NPPF, and provides clarification where required.
4To ensure that proper consideration is given to the impact of changes resulting from this...
Concluded (the committee's words)
To ensure that proper consideration is given to the impact of changes resulting from this consultation, and from other developments in the housing and planning sector, the Department should carry out a comprehensive review of the operation of the National Planning Policy Framework before the end of this Parliament. The review must include sufficient opportunity for appropriate consultation with stakeholders, and should follow a two-stage approach to consulting, first on general principles, and subsequently on precise wording.
5We hope that the Department will learn lessons from the need to extend the consultation...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We hope that the Department will learn lessons from the need to extend the consultation period as a result of the holiday period and the other significant developments in the housing and planning sector.
6We are not yet persuaded that the proposals in the consultation will encourage the development...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We are not yet persuaded that the proposals in the consultation will encourage the development of new settlements, partly as a result of the tension between identification of a five-year land supply and the development of new settlements which might take more than five years to complete. This tension could deter the development of new settlements, or result in them being phased in such a way as to reduce their impact on the housing supply.
7The Department should identify and put in place arrangements to ensure that where there are...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Department should identify and put in place arrangements to ensure that where there are robust plans in place for the delivery of a new settlement which may take more than five years, some account can be taken of this land as part of the five-year Department for Communities and Local Government’s consultation on national planning policy 27 land supply identified in the Local Plan, but councils should not be able to overly- rely on land in the five-year land supply which in reality will take longer than five years to build out.
8In its response to this report, the Department should provide further detail about how the...
Concluded (the committee's words)
In its response to this report, the Department should provide further detail about how the measures to support the development of garden towns and villages announced in the 2016 Budget will relate to the new settlements proposals in the consultation.
9In its response to this report, the Department should confirm whether the Starter Homes Land...
Concluded (the committee's words)
In its response to this report, the Department should confirm whether the Starter Homes Land Fund [announced in the 2016 Budget] constitutes new funding, available in addition to the Brownfield Regeneration Fund.
10It is important that there is flexibility for local authorities to fully consider particular sites’...
Concluded (the committee's words)
It is important that there is flexibility for local authorities to fully consider particular sites’ suitability for development before they are included on the brownfield site register. There must also be clarity about the definition of ‘brownfield’, so that national planning policy can be applied consistently across England.
11We recommend that as part of its response to the consultation, the Department draws up...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that as part of its response to the consultation, the Department draws up an authoritative definition of brownfield sites to which the presumption in favour of development proposed in the consultation will apply.
12We believe that there is a need for greater clarity about how the proposed presumption...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We believe that there is a need for greater clarity about how the proposed presumption in favour of development will operate alongside the register of brownfield sites, and how the register will be used to deliver the granting of ‘permission in principle’, in particular who will bear the costs of achieving that permission and what it will entail.
13We recommend that in its response to this report, the Department sets out how the...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that in its response to this report, the Department sets out how the brownfield site register and permission in principle system will operate in practice, including the arrangements for community engagement and consultation, and the relationship between permission in principle and technical details.
14We have particular concerns about the risk that developers will delay developing brownfield sites because...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We have particular concerns about the risk that developers will delay developing brownfield sites because local authorities will be required to release more profitable greenfield sites if insufficient housing is delivered to meet local needs.
15In its response to this report, the Government should set out how its proposals will...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In its response to this report, the Government should set out how its proposals will overcome the potential cost barriers to the development of brownfield sites, and the steps it will take to encourage the development of such sites in order to meet local housing needs.
16We agree that, in some circumstances, it may be appropriate for local authorities to allocate...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We agree that, in some circumstances, it may be appropriate for local authorities to allocate Green Belt land for housing, and establish new Green Belt land elsewhere. As a rule, local authorities should carry out proper reviews of the Green Belt as an integral part of their local planning process. However, at present, we do not believe that there is sufficient guidance available to local authorities on whether it is appropriate for Green Belt land to be used to meet housing needs, although 28 Department for Communities and Local Government’s consultation on national planning policy in practice many local authorities are allowing for development in the Green Belt. We are likely to return to this as part of our future work on housing supply.
17In the short term, the Government should publish guidance for local authorities, setting clear guidelines...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In the short term, the Government should publish guidance for local authorities, setting clear guidelines on when and how it may be appropriate for a local authority to review its Green Belt boundary in order to deliver new homes to meet local need.
18To assess whether its small site policy is having the intended positive effect on small...
Recommended (the committee's words)
To assess whether its small site policy is having the intended positive effect on small and medium-sized builders and developers, the Government should monitor its impact, and provide us with an update on the numbers of small and medium- sized builders and developers in the construction industry twelve months after the proposals have come into effect.
19While we welcome the Minister’s reassurance that where Neighbourhood and Local Plans are in place,...
Concluded (the committee's words)
While we welcome the Minister’s reassurance that where Neighbourhood and Local Plans are in place, development on small sites will only take place with the support of the local community, we believe that there is a risk that the presumption in favour of development on small sites could have a cumulatively detrimental effect if multiple small sites within an area are developed. In addition, not all local areas have Local Plans in place, and relatively few have adopted Neighbourhood Plans.
20The Department should review the proposals relating to presumption in favour of development of small...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Department should review the proposals relating to presumption in favour of development of small sites to ensure that local authorities have sufficient flexibility to mitigate against harmful unintended consequences.
21We would be concerned if a presumption in favour of development on small sites adversely...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We would be concerned if a presumption in favour of development on small sites adversely affected existing settlements, or led to landowners being less likely to bring forward land for rural exception sites.
22In its response to this report, the Department should set out how its proposals for...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In its response to this report, the Department should set out how its proposals for changes to the National Planning Policy Framework will complement the existing rural exception site policy, and ensure that rural communities’ needs for affordable housing are met.
23We understand stakeholders’ concerns about the potential impact on the delivery of other types of...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We understand stakeholders’ concerns about the potential impact on the delivery of other types of affordable housing, and reiterate recommendation 28 of our Housing associations and the Right to Buy report: Home builders will understandably seek to build the products with the highest return, and we are concerned that the Government’s policy should not lead to fewer truly affordable homes to rent being built. There is a finite amount of money available from developers to deliver affordable housing, and the duty placed on councils is likely to mean that building Starter Homes could be prioritised over other types of affordable housing. Local authorities Department for Communities and Local Government’s consultation on national planning policy 29 will be under pressure to satisfy their legal obligations, and this could make negotiations with developers extremely difficult and could undermine Local Plans. Starter Homes should not be built at the expense of other forms of tenure; where the need exists, it is vital that homes for affordable rent are built to reflect local needs. The definition of affordable housing should better reflect individual and local circumstances.
24The Government should monitor the impact of the inclusion of Starter Homes in the definition...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government should monitor the impact of the inclusion of Starter Homes in the definition of affordable housing on the availability of other types of affordable housing. We expect the Department to provide information to us on an annual basis on the mix of affordable housing which is delivered following the implementation of the proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework.
25We recognise that the Government plans to ensure a continuing supply of Starter Homes, and...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We recognise that the Government plans to ensure a continuing supply of Starter Homes, and we support the aspiration of enabling people to own their own homes.
26Nevertheless, we are concerned about the effect on the supply of affordable housing of removing...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Nevertheless, we are concerned about the effect on the supply of affordable housing of removing the discount ‘in perpetuity’ restrictions, and reiterate recommendation 29 in our recent report on Housing associations and the Right to Buy: We urge the Government to review the period of time over which the [Starter Home] discount would operate.
27We believe that when decisions are taken about whether unviable or unused commercial or industrial...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We believe that when decisions are taken about whether unviable or unused commercial or industrial land should be used for housing, local authorities should have discretion to take local circumstances into account.
28In addition to being able to protect commercial or industrial land from development if appropriate...
Concluded (the committee's words)
In addition to being able to protect commercial or industrial land from development if appropriate to do so in the local circumstances, local authorities should have the flexibility to decide that housing other than Starter Homes may be developed on such land, if that housing would better meet identified local housing needs.
29We are disappointed that four years after the National Planning Policy Framework was published, 17...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We are disappointed that four years after the National Planning Policy Framework was published, 17 per cent of local authorities have still not published Local Plans and 34 per cent have not yet adopted Plans.
30In its response to our report, we expect the Department to set out how it...
Concluded (the committee's words)
In its response to our report, we expect the Department to set out how it intends to use its powers of intervention in local authorities which do not have Local Plans in place by early 2017, and how many local authorities it expects will require such intervention. In the light of the Local Plans Expert Group’s report, the Department should reconsider the recommendation made by our predecessors that a statutory duty should be placed on local authorities to produce and maintain Local Plans.
31We believe that the housing delivery test will provide clarity about whether the housing delivery...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We believe that the housing delivery test will provide clarity about whether the housing delivery in a local area is sufficient to meet the identified local need. However, we are not yet persuaded that the consequences for under-delivery are such that they 30 Department for Communities and Local Government’s consultation on national planning policy will bring about increased housing delivery. The proposed consequence of identified under-delivery—requiring local authorities to allocate more land for development— may not, by itself, mean that more houses will be built.
32We believe that if the housing delivery test is to be an effective mechanism for...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We believe that if the housing delivery test is to be an effective mechanism for ensuring that housing supply meets housing demand, there should be a combination of both carrot and stick. Local authorities must have a range of tools at their disposal which are appropriate to their local circumstances, including direct involvement in developments, either independently or in partnership with developers. There should also be a clearer set of criteria which may be used to identify when a development scheme has stalled.
33The Department should review the appropriate consequences of housing under- delivery.
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Department should review the appropriate consequences of housing under- delivery. In addition to the consequences already proposed where local authorities may be failing to grant permissions or allocate sufficient land, this should include identifying the powers local authorities ought to have in order to require or encourage developers to build out sites in their areas.
34Local authorities are best placed to know their own areas, and the definition of a...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Local authorities are best placed to know their own areas, and the definition of a commuter hub should not be unnecessarily restrictive. But even so the proposed definition is too vague and is therefore unhelpful both to local authorities and local communities. While it rightly addresses the presence of transport infrastructure, it does not take account of whether that infrastructure has, or will have, sufficient capacity to accommodate higher housing density. We welcome the Minister’s confirmation that the final definition of a commuter hub will be published by summer 2016, alongside any other changes made to the National Planning Policy Framework. Nevertheless, local authorities and communities preparing or reviewing Local Plans at present need to have clarity about the framework within which those Plans are being made.
35We recommend that the Department reviews the proposed definition of a commuter hub as a...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Department reviews the proposed definition of a commuter hub as a matter of priority, with a view to removing the present ambiguity and providing greater clarity about which locations are included, and should therefore be expected to have higher levels of housing density. The revised definition should be published before the House rises in July 2016, and the Department must listen carefully to any ongoing concerns about the definition’s clarity.
Evidence
Oral evidence sessions 2
- 24 Feb 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗
- 8 Feb 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗