Mark Behrendt, Planning Manager for HBF, reflects on the impact of local politics on the planning system and makes the case for joined up strategic planning at a larger scale, across defined sub regions or countries.

In the King’s Speech, the Government announced its intention to give enhanced strategic planning powers to local leaders in a new English Devolution Bill. Strategic planning across sub-regions or counties is one of the most important tools that local authorities can use to support housing delivery in their areas – ensuring that housing needs arising in a specific local authority area (such as an inner city) are shared out among neighbouring local authorities.

This kind of planning at a subregional level is nothing new, with the Greater Norwich Local Plan, adopted earlier this year, being a recent example. Nevertheless, the delivery of larger-than-local plans is currently the exception rather than the norm and is often hostage to local political whims.

The impact of local politics

After seeing the internecine squabble between Oxford and the other Oxfordshire authorities on the housing needs of the county, it is difficult to see how under the current system the development needs of constrained local authorities such as Oxford can be adequately planned for. What was evident at the recent hearing was that changing political leadership, often brought about by local anti-development sentiments, can scupper even the most solid of joint working arrangements.

By way of background, all the Oxfordshire authorities had been looking to prepare a joint spatial plan but changes in political leadership saw it being dropped. Oxford City and Cherwell District Council in north Oxfordshire then jointly commissioned a Housing and Economic Need Assessment with Oxford to assess housing needs for the city and county as whole. However, they declined to support Oxford’s position based on this work at a recent hearing following changes in political leadership in the May local elections – with a Conservative administration being replaced by a Liberal Democrat, Green and independent coalition.

Therefore, proactive agreements to support growth and build homes for another area can easily be reined back following political change, with local politicians turning inwards and thinking solely about meeting the needs of their own areas.

Political change at a local level has long been a fact of life for planners and one that has to be accommodated. However, as the Oxfordshire example shows, when it comes to preparing local plans and cross boundary working, local politics can also be a major barrier to delivery. The Government has already had to step in to prevent plans that meet their own needs from being withdrawn from examination due to changes in leadership, and this does not bode well for the future of voluntary joint working to address the unmet needs of our cities and most physically constrained areas.

Furthermore, if local plans often become a political stick with which to beat whoever is in charge, it is no wonder local politicians shy away from proper strategic planning that could mean their areas delivering more housing than the minimum set out in national policy. It can be hoped that the new Government will address some of these issues.

The future of strategic planning

In order to meet the ambitious targets being proposed by the Government, we clearly need to move away from planning at such small geographical areas where local concerns trump strategic national ambitions and prepare strategic plans at a larger than local level. This does not mean a move back to regional spatial strategies but rather strategic plans across defined sub regions or counties.

Planning at a larger spatial area will have many benefits for the effectiveness of the planning system and wider society. For instance, constraints can be considered at a strategic level with a more realistic and balanced consideration of their current function and the harm that may arise as a result of new development. Furthermore, given that the majority of infrastructure is planned for beyond the level of most local plans, and rarely follows political boundaries, it allows for the infrastructure needed to support development to be planned for more effectively. Improved co-ordination between new development and infrastructure delivery could also ensure the greatest benefits go to those areas that take most. Finally, strategic plans correspond better with wider housing and employment markets.

The new Government has set out its intention to strengthen the strategic planning powers of Mayors in its new English Devolution Bill. However, as outlined in HBF’s blueprint for the new Government, it is important that these spatial plan-making powers are both statutory and mandatory in strategically important areas. The West Midlands Combined Authority, for instance, already has these powers but they have not been used because they are merely optional. Furthermore, if strategic plans were to be mandatory, it would avoid scenarios in which political change in one of the constituent local authorities led to the end of joint working arrangements. The Government must also consider how it will encourage joint working between local authorities in those areas that are not Combined Authorities – such as in Oxfordshire.

Overall, though, it is clear that strategic planning at a ‘larger-than-local’ level will play a much bigger role in our planning landscape in the years ahead.

Mark oversees local planning matters across the South Each and Eastern regions. He has responsibility for reviewing local plans and the preparation of written representations to these plans, attending Examination Hearings and on-going engagement with Local Planning Authorities.