Greenbelt: Local Plans

Opened the debate

I am deeply concerned by the inclusion of green belt in the local plan during the recent consultation process. My constituents are worried that potential brownfield sites could be built on instead, and they have shown incredible support with thousands of signatures against building on their green space. They feel Three Rivers District Council has not yet demonstrated other reasonable options for meeting its identified need for development as required by national planning policy.

Government Response

It is a huge pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Nokes. It is also my particular pleasure to be able to address hon. Members as the representative of the new Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. Levelling up is about empowering local leaders and communities and creating nice places to live, both of which are highly relevant to this debate. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Dean Russell) for securing this important debate. His constituency, as he said, includes areas governed by two local authorities—Watford and Three Rivers. His constituents are hugely fortunate to have my hon. Friend as their MP. He is a relentless, articulate and learned champion for them, particularly on this issue. I reiterate the Government's absolutely unwavering commitment to protecting the green belt. There has been no greater advocate for the green belt and for our valued countryside than the Prime Minister. He could not have been clearer in his address to the party conference two weeks ago. Homes should not be built on green fields if we can possibly help it. Councils must meet two clear tests to make any changes regarding green-belt boundaries, including showing that every other reasonable option has been exhausted and consulting local people before submitting a revised plan for examination by an inspector. If a local authority finds that it really cannot avoid removing land from the green belt, it is expected to offset the loss of that land through environmental and access improvements to the remaining green belt. On brownfield development, the national planning policy framework strongly encourages regeneration and reuse of brownfield sites, especially for housing need and town centre regeneration. We have already widened permitted development rules and provided significant funding to unlock brownfield sites, such as £58 million allocated to 53 councils through our brownfield land release fund, which will help protect the countryside and green spaces. Government have made significant investment in brownfield-first regeneration, including the £4.35-billion housing infrastructure fund, the £4.95-billion home building fund, the £400 million brownfield housing fund, and the £75-million brownfield land release fund. Furthermore, through land remediation relief, the Government provide a deduction of 100% from corporation tax for clean-up of contaminated land acquired from third parties. I must be clear that the use of the standard method in plan making is not mandatory, but it helps communities to gain a clear understanding of the minimum number of new homes required to inform local plans. It is just a starting point when measuring an area's housing need and does not dictate where the new homes go. The main purpose of the green belt is to ensure that our towns and cities grow in a sustainable way, supporting climate change resilience, as part of our green infrastructure, and aiding natural world growth and recovery. That makes it all the more important for communities to be able to engage with the planning process to ensure that councillors and planning authorities make the right decisions when they come to balance homes and jobs with protecting our precious countryside for future generations.