Minister rejects claim that planning reforms designed to penalise farmers – UK politics live
Housing minister defends reforms in planning bill ahead of publication saying they are not aimed at farmersGood morning. The government’s planning and infrastructure bill is being published later today, and in an article for the Times Angela Rayner, the deputy PM and housing secretary, claims it will be “a major step forward in getting Britain building again”. The measures in the legislation have already been well publicised and Rayner sums them up like this.A new road for Norwich was set to make life easier for 44,000 homeowners, speeding up journeys to East Anglia’s biggest hospital and creating 33,000 new jobs. But it was delayed by spurious legal challenges for two years until the case was dismissed as having no logical basis. This government gave it the green light last week.The many organisations that must be consulted in the planning process are also putting up unnecessary obstacles. A row over balls hit from a cricket club has delayed 139 new flats in Bradford. The wait for a development consent order increased by 65 per cent between 2012 and 2021. It now takes around four years to get a decision on major infrastructure.We have been supportive of many of the Government’s changes to planning policy, but giving councils more power to reduce the value of land is a step too far, especially in the context of such a challenging outlook for farmers and the inheritance tax fiasco.This is not about people blocking development, it’s about the state paying the market price for land. We need more houses and more economic development, but not at the cost of basic principles.We are obviously and very clearly not setting out to target agricultural land. The land use framework we’re consulting on currently will ensure that prime agricultural land is protected, and food security is protected.I see this power being used in particular, to much greater effect – and that’s where I want to see it come forward – specifically in urban areas, on previously developed brownfield land where regeneration projects with a significant public interest can be unlocked more easily. Continue reading...
admin
Housing minister defends reforms in planning bill ahead of publication saying they are not aimed at farmers
Good morning. The government’s planning and infrastructure bill is being published later today, and in an article for the Times Angela Rayner, the deputy PM and housing secretary, claims it will be “a major step forward in getting Britain building again”. The measures in the legislation have already been well publicised and Rayner sums them up like this.
A new road for Norwich was set to make life easier for 44,000 homeowners, speeding up journeys to East Anglia’s biggest hospital and creating 33,000 new jobs. But it was delayed by spurious legal challenges for two years until the case was dismissed as having no logical basis. This government gave it the green light last week.
The many organisations that must be consulted in the planning process are also putting up unnecessary obstacles. A row over balls hit from a cricket club has delayed 139 new flats in Bradford. The wait for a development consent order increased by 65 per cent between 2012 and 2021. It now takes around four years to get a decision on major infrastructure.
We have been supportive of many of the Government’s changes to planning policy, but giving councils more power to reduce the value of land is a step too far, especially in the context of such a challenging outlook for farmers and the inheritance tax fiasco.
This is not about people blocking development, it’s about the state paying the market price for land. We need more houses and more economic development, but not at the cost of basic principles.
We are obviously and very clearly not setting out to target agricultural land. The land use framework we’re consulting on currently will ensure that prime agricultural land is protected, and food security is protected.
I see this power being used in particular, to much greater effect – and that’s where I want to see it come forward – specifically in urban areas, on previously developed brownfield land where regeneration projects with a significant public interest can be unlocked more easily. Continue reading...
