Labour’s top-down planning reforms

The Green Belt was created by the post-war Labour government, underpinned by a substantial parliamentary majority similar to that enjoyed by Sir Keir Starmer. To this day, the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act remains the template for decision-making, despite umpteen reform attempts aimed at speeding up building both of new housing and essential infrastructure.

The new Government is to make another effort at unblocking what everyone accepts is a sclerotic system but no-one has been able to free up. As with its 1940s predecessor, Labour’s answer is a top-down, centralised, interventionist approach. 

Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, said new quotas for building homes would be imposed on local councils, while developments deemed to be in the national interest would be prioritised over local objections.

As a statement of intent, two major projects to build new data centres on green belt land in the South East and blocked by planners will be revisited. The developers said they would create jobs, unlock foreign investment, and boost growth in the local and national economy. Both were refused planning permission over concerns that they would harm the local environment, but Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, may now let them proceed. 

Ms Reeves also said the ban on onshore wind farms would be lifted immediately, with local communities receiving unspecified benefits, presumably in the form of cheaper electricity. Labour has moved quickly on this agenda now that the biggest obstacle – the threat of a Tory backbench rebellion – has been neutralised by the election result. Many of the seats likely to be affected are in the hands of the Lib Dems, who do not have the votes to oppose these reforms even with Conservative support.

Permitting the construction of new housing, data centres and energy infrastructure is a central plank of Labour’s dash for growth on which everything else it has promised depends. The Government believes it has a mandate to override local objections to nationally important projects and has the majority to push them through, even in the Green Belt. 

Ms Reeves said “a new growth-focused approach to the planning system” would take shape before the end of the month. Her ambition is clear. But the collateral damage of this “national mission” will be the environment and local democracy.