Commons Sense

House of Commons · General Debate

Future of the Planning System in England

17 June 2021 · 13 other contributors

Opened by Clive Betts Lab Sheffield South East

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Clive Betts raised concerns about future of the planning system in england in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.

Key points

  • The Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee's report supports digitising local plans but expresses significant concern about reshaping them by zoning every site into a growth, renewal or protected area within 30 months.
  • Clive Betts emphasised concerns regarding public involvement and democratic processes at local council levels, highlighting that proposals lack detail and could lead to judicial reviews.
  • He also called for further research on public involvement in the planning system, clarity on achieving housing targets, and caution about sweeping away section 106 agreements.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Clive Betts Lab Sheffield South East

The Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee's report on the planning system was launched partly in response to the Government’s proposed reforms. The report supports digitising local plans but expresses significant concern about reshaping them by zoning every site into a growth, renewal or protected area within 30 months. Clive Betts emphasised concerns regarding public involvement and democratic processes at local council levels, highlighting that proposals lack detail and could lead to judicial reviews. He also called for further research on public involvement in the planning system, clarity on achieving housing targets, and caution about sweeping away section 106 agreements.

Other contributors (13)
  • Acknowledged the work of the Committee and invited Clive Betts to visit his two planning authorities to ensure that green areas around towns like Worthing are protected from development. Emphasised the importance of local councillors in the planning process and highlighted the absence of non-housing development considerations such as commercial, religious, sports, and children's facilities.

  • Mohammad Yasin Lab Bedford

    Thanked Clive Betts for his statement and praised him for his tireless work on producing the report. He questioned whether the Government’s approach to permitted development undermines their policy objectives in the planning White Paper, particularly concerning local and neighbourhood plans.

  • Clive Betts Lab Sheffield South East

    Responded to questions regarding the detailed zoning of growth areas, emphasising that such zones need to be subject to full public consultation and must clearly define aspects like height and density. He also highlighted the importance of retaining statutory notice requirements for planning applications to ensure transparency, equality, and local democracy.

  • Bob Blackman Con Harrow East

    Asked about the concerns regarding zoning areas within a local authority area without much scrutiny at the local planning stage. He emphasised that such zones should be subject to full public consultation with clear boundaries defined for height, density and other aspects of development.

  • Rachel Hopkins Lab Luton South and South Bedfordshire

    Welcomed the report's work on retaining statutory notice requirements in physical form, such as local newspapers or lamp posts, alongside digital arrangements to avoid exclusion for those without digital access.

  • Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Con North Cotswolds

    Commented on the housing needs formula and suggested that a revised approach should consider affordability and housing mix. He highlighted how the current formula would lead to a staggering increase in housing numbers in areas like the Cotswolds.

  • Liz Twist Lab Blaydon and Consett

    Emphasised the importance of ensuring that individuals can still comment on individual planning proposals. She also questioned how provisions in the proposed planning Bill and Environment Bill would work together to safeguard natural environment and biodiversity.

  • Acknowledged constituents' concerns about disproportionate share of housing, quality, environmental impact, affordability, and infrastructure support. Highlighted the challenge in ensuring public voice on these issues is not lost in reforms.

  • Tim Farron Lib Dem Westmorland and Lonsdale

    Called for tackling excessive second home ownership in holiday areas like Cumbria, which can rob communities of a permanent population. He suggested making holiday lets and second homes a different category of planning use to protect these communities.

  • Welcomed the report's emphasis on continuing involvement for elected representatives and local communities in shaping their areas. Questioned about increasing the supply of qualified planners, given many local authorities struggle with staffing levels.

  • Ruth Cadbury Lab Brentford and Isleworth

    Congratulates the Chair of the Committee on a comprehensive report about the Government's levelling-up agenda and net zero commitments. Asks whether the White Paper includes enough detail regarding these two issues.

  • Clive Betts Lab Sheffield South East

    Responds by stating that neither climate change nor levelling up is mentioned in the White Paper, highlighting concerns over changes to the housing needs formula and potential difficulties for cities in meeting housing requirements without building on green belts. Also mentions a reduction in support from Homes England.

  • Thanks the Chair of the Select Committee for his statement and responses, then announces a suspension for three minutes due to covid protection measures.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy