← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Community Infrastructure Levy: Homeowners
29 April 2026
Lead MP
Jeremy Hunt
Godalming and Ash
Con
Responding Minister
Matthew Pennycook
Tags
Standards & Ethics
Word Count: 8979
Other Contributors: 7
At a Glance
Jeremy Hunt raised concerns about community infrastructure levy: homeowners in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
I urge the Government to reform CIL legislation to distinguish between commercial developers and householders, provide clear guidance for local councils not to charge homeowners, establish a mechanism for redress and correct mistakes after liability notices, and specify that interest from unspent CIL should go back into the CIL account.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
I am concerned about the profound life-changing consequences for ordinary families across the country due to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). There are now more than 100 known cases of homeowners facing unexpected CIL charges, ranging from £26,000 to £235,000. £235,000. Some councils, like Waverley in my constituency, have charged over £550 per square metre, one of the highest rates in the country. Families are being forced to sell or remortgage their homes and face immense financial burdens alongside stress and uncertainty.
Gareth Bacon
Con
Orpington
Critiqued the inconsistent enforcement of the Commun [6D [K Community Infrastructure Levy on private homeowners, highlighting its finan [5D [K financial burden and lack of exemptions for minor home improvements. Mentio [6D [K Mentioned specific cases where residents faced exorbitant bills with no rig [3D [K right to appeal. Called for better guidance from the Government to local au [2D [K authorities on CIL enforcement.
Gideon Amos
Lib Dem
Taunton and Wellington
Mr Amos highlights that families are facing bills of [2D [K of £40,000 to £70,000 for missing forms. He criticises the Conservative cou [3D [K council administration for implementing the CIL charging schedule and calls [5D [K calls for changes in regulations. The right hon. Gentleman is correct that residents n [1D [K need redress, but the nature of errors or mistakes in charging can vary bet [3D [K between authorities. In West Berkshire, a procedural error was made, leadin [6D [K leading to different remedies.
Gregory Stafford
Con
Farnham and Bordon
The community infrastructure levy is intended to sup [3D [K support growth through infrastructure, but in parts of Farnham and Bordon t [1D [K the promise is broken. £30 million has been collected and left unspent by W [1D [K Waverley borough council, with interest accruing at £125,000 a month absorb [6D [K absorbed into general spending rather than ringfenced for infrastructure. H [1D [K Homeowners making changes to their properties are being aggressively pursue [6D [K pursued and charged exorbitant rates; in Farnham the rate is £547.17 per sq [2D [K square metre, rising to nearly £570 in Haslemere. Residents face CIL liabil [6D [K liabilities of nearly £1 million without support from the council. Mr Stafford corrects a previous statement that CIL w [1D [K was introduced by Conservatives in Waverley, noting it was implemented by t [1D [K the Liberal Democrats. He calls for more flexible systems like those used e [1D [K elsewhere.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Jim Shannon highlighted the cautionary tale from Nor [3D [K Northern Ireland, which operates without a CIL-style levy and relies on bes [3D [K bespoke section 76 agreements. He noted that this approach has led to a mul [3D [K multibillion-pound funding gap for infrastructure in Northern Ireland.
John Milne
Lib Dem
Horsham
My constituent Ruth had to pay a £38,000 CIL charge [K due to her husband's Alzheimer's preventing him from submitting correct for [3D [K forms. The Government cannot intervene because the rules were followed tech [4D [K technically, despite the injustice. The CIL rules are too inflexible and va [2D [K vague.
Kit Malthouse
Con
North West Hampshire
Kit Malthouse supported his right hon. Friend's illu [4D [K illustration of injustices caused by CIL and discussed the macroeconomic im [2D [K impact, noting that small builders have been heavily impacted since the cra [3D [K crash in 2008.
Richard Foord
Lib Dem
Honiton and Sidmouth
Richard Foord shared the view that when CIL was intr [4D [K introduced, it was not meant to penalise people adding extensions or seekin [6D [K seeking to self-build but rather as a levy on large-scale infrastructure to [2D [K to reinvest into the community. My hon. Friend reminds the House that his colleague, [10D [K colleague, Mr Dillon, tabled a new clause on CIL guidance for the English D [1D [K Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which was not accepted by the Go [2D [K Government. He suggests looking at other legislative opportunities to addre [5D [K address these issues.
Government Response
Matthew Pennycook
Government Response
The Government recognise concerns about CIL liabilities applying to householder and self-build developments. The current balance between transparency, certainty, and consistency has not always been achieved in practice. Therefore, the Government intend to consult on proposals to amend the CIL regulations to improve the process for obtaining exemptions. These proposals aim to minimise procedural errors and prevent significant unexpected charges for homeowners and self-builders while ensuring local planning authorities can properly administer CIL. The consultation will be published before the summer recess.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.