Labour proposes no reform of the #NPPF – whatever the DCMS select Committee Says

So now we know they ‘wouldnt change’ this  extremely poorly drafted counterproductive crock of shite.

The sector wants certainty but it doesn’t want idiocy, sprawl, lack of strategy or an appeal led planning vacuum.  Congratulations Hiliary Benn you have just abandoned any pretence to being a progressive environmental party.  Just keep whatever Ayn Rand inspired rubbish which led to the greatest drop in housebuilding in recorded history and has created war the countryside which really really cleverly abandoning strategic growth at the same time.  So Hiliarywhy should anyone vote Labour if they care about good planning?

Hiliary Benn has committed to not reform the NPPF even if the DCMS select committee finds that part of it need change and clarification because it is not working even on its most basic objectives of increasing planning and housebuilding.  Very clever, very clever indeed to throw away any political advantage or campaigning position you have.  Why not simply wear a vote Nigel Tee shirt Hiliary?

Labour has dropped plans to reform controversial planning rules which are allowing builders to push through new housing schemes across the country against the wishes of local people.

The news will dismay communities across England who are fighting housing schemes which are being allowed under the Coalition’s National Planning Policy Framework..

Last week the Telegraph disclosed how the number of large scale housing estates being pushed through by developers across England soared in the two years since the NPPF was introduced in March 2012.

The announcement, from shadow Local Government secretary Hillary Benn at a conference on Thursday morning, is an about-turn because the party had briefed last year that it would scrap the NPPF.

At a construction conference on Thursday morning Mr Benn said that a Labour Government would keep the NPPF in place.

He said: “No we wouldn’t change it because I think the sector wants some certainty and I think that is very important.”

Mr Benn said that instead Labour would focus on forcing developers to release land for new homes, rather than sitting on vast land banks.

In January Labour commissioned Sir Michael Lyons, a former chairman of the BBC Trust, to look at how a Labour Government could increase housing supply to 200,000 new homes a year by 2020.

Mr Benn said: “We would not change that basic structure but we are looking at through Sir Michael Lyons’ commission is how can we make sure that the sites are that are ‘permissioned’ are the ones where the building gets on and delivers.”

This has fuelled suggestions that Labour wants to embark on a huge house-building programme if it wins the 2015 general election.

The 52-page NPPF, which replaced more than 1,400 pages of guidance in England, was opposed by rural campaigners.

Under the NPPF, councils in England have to publish and adopt local plans which set out where development can take place for the next five years.

Speaking after the event, [and I guess a text telling him off from Roberta Blackman Wood Mp] Mr Benn added – while the NPPF would not be scrapped – the party was still committed to forcing more builders to use up more brownfield sites in towns and cities.

He said:: “We have always made it clear that there are some specific changes we want to make to the planning system to strengthen the brownfield policy – after all if there are brownfield sites that can be built upon that’s where as much housing as possible should go – and to ensure that all councils are making a proper assessment of housing need.

“And we would also give communities more power to make sure that where planning permission has been granted on a site the homes get built.”

 

2 thoughts on “Labour proposes no reform of the #NPPF – whatever the DCMS select Committee Says

  1. Off topic – I just wanted to say thank you for introducing me to C. A. Phillip’s book “Bank Credit”. It has helped to clarify my understanding of a number of features of the banking system and filled in several gaps in my knowledge of the history of the development of banking.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s