Recommendations & Conclusions
4 items
3
Conclusion
46th Report - Improving local areas thr…
Acknowledged
There are additional local planning authorities for whom starting to operate the Community Infrastructure Levy would be both feasible and beneficial. In November 2024, only 52% of all LPAs were operating the CIL. The CIL was intended to make getting contributions from developers fairer, faster, and more certain and transparent. …
Read more
There are additional local planning authorities for whom starting to operate the Community Infrastructure Levy would be both feasible and beneficial. In November 2024, only 52% of all LPAs were operating the CIL. The CIL was intended to make getting contributions from developers fairer, faster, and more certain and transparent. Payment by developers is generally up-front and non-negotiable, and LPAs may spend the monies on infrastructure across the local area, rather than being limited to a specific site. However, the CIL has some limitations, including being resource-intensive and time-consuming to set up, creating a barrier to introduction, and it cannot be used to part fund social housing. There is also often less take-up in areas with lower land value. The Department explains that some LPAs may have delayed introducing the CIL because they were waiting to see the outcome of plans to introduce the previously proposed new infrastructure levy, which would have largely replaced the current system. However, the Department accepts that it would potentially be useful to identify LPAs where CIL ought to be viable but where there are other reasons why it has not been introduced. recommendation The Department should work more proactively with the Planning Advisory Service, to identify LPAs where CIL ought to be viable and encourage wider take-up of the CIL where this is appropriate.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and states it will continue ongoing work with the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) to consider how to support local authorities in making best use of tools like the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). It expects more areas to consider CIL adoption following the …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
1
Conclusion
46th Report - Improving local areas thr…
Acknowledged
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (the Department) on improving local areas in England through developer funding.1
Government response AI summary
The government agrees (with an unstated recommendation) and will explore proportionate and efficient ways of collecting and analysing data from Infrastructure Funding Statements (IFSs) to improve understanding of developer contributions. It also reminded Local Planning Authorities of their statutory duty to publish IFSs.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14
Conclusion
46th Report - Improving local areas thr…
Acknowledged
The CIL was introduced through the Planning Act 2008, which gave LPAs the option to introduce a locally developed charging system. It was intended to make the system fairer, faster, and more certain and transparent. Payment by developers is generally up-front and non-negotiable, and LPAs may spend the monies on …
Read more
The CIL was introduced through the Planning Act 2008, which gave LPAs the option to introduce a locally developed charging system. It was intended to make the system fairer, faster, and more certain and transparent. Payment by developers is generally up-front and non-negotiable, and LPAs may spend the monies on infrastructure across the local area, rather than being limited to a specific site. But there is lower take up in areas with lower land values, and it can be expensive and time-consuming to set up, creating a barrier to introduction. In November 2024, only 52% of authorities were operating the CIL.20
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and expects more local planning authorities to adopt CIL following Royal Assent of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which will empower Mayoral Strategic Authorities to raise a Mayoral CIL. It will also continue supporting LPA capacity and capability to help …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
15
Conclusion
46th Report - Improving local areas thr…
Acknowledged
Given that it can provide benefits for the local community, we asked the Department why more authorities were not operating the CIL, as only 52% of local authorities operate them. The Department explained that 16 Q 30 17 Q 31; C&AG’s Report, para 1.13 and Figure 4 18 C&AG’s Report, …
Read more
Given that it can provide benefits for the local community, we asked the Department why more authorities were not operating the CIL, as only 52% of local authorities operate them. The Department explained that 16 Q 30 17 Q 31; C&AG’s Report, para 1.13 and Figure 4 18 C&AG’s Report, para 1.14 19 Qq 30–32 20 C&AG’s Report, para 1.7 and Figures 1 and 2 10 the CIL is not always an appropriate instrument for LPAs to use, largely because of financial viability issues and the potential for it to disincentivise development in their areas. It also reflected that some LPAs may have paused their plans to introduce the CIL while the previous government considered whether to introduce a new mandatory infrastructure levy. The Department said that, since all authorities now understood that the new levy was not going ahead, more might decide to use the CIL.21
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's recommendation that more local authorities should operate the CIL and supports LPA capacity through the PAS and funding, and will work with PAS to support local authorities in using CIL effectively and implementing planning reforms.
Read full response →
HM Treasury