You’re not allowed to comment publicly about the laws your department is introducing if you’re a PPS. As Michael Gove’s PPS at the Department for Levelling Up, I've therefore not been able to comment on the discussions that have been going on between colleagues of mine and the Department about amendments to the Levelling Up bill.
However, the outcomes of those discussions are now public. The Bill was already going to do a number of important things, like end the requirement for councils to demonstrate a ‘5-year land supply’, as long as they have an up-to-date local plan. Too often this has been used by developers to force areas into building houses where they didn’t want to.
Michael Gove’s emphasis is on what he has termed BIDEN: he wants there to be an emphasis on beauty in how homes are built; on infrastructure; on (local) democracy; on the environment; and on creating neighbourhoods – which, as I have previously written, I completely support. He feels the current system does not provide the right homes in the right places, as do I.
Much of the debate in the past couple of weeks has been about the role of housing targets that are set by central government. Targets have their place because governments want to be able to increase home ownership and the risk of no targets is no new houses being built. But the way in which targets have operated has too often forced homes into areas where local people feel they are not needed.
Under the changes that have been agreed, while there will still be central calculations for housing numbers, they will be advisory, not mandatory and local authorities will be able to determine how many homes can actually be built, taking into account what should be protected in that area, from the Green Belt to heritage assets.
Areas that have ‘overdelivered’ on their housing numbers, which has often been the case with South Oxfordshire and the Vale, will be able to make the case to lower the number they need to plan for. While not like for like, already this year 1,657 new homes have been registered in this constituency compared to a national average of 242.
The Government will consult on allowing councils to refuse applications from developers who have built slowly in the past and it will end the ‘duty to cooperate’ that lets cities impose their housing needs on the surrounding area.
The Government will also be identifying further measures to incentivise brownfield land being built on over greenfield land and has asked the Competition and Markets Authority to consider a study of how the market operates. These are all things I think are very welcome.
