We need a plan: getting old, and the “Levelling Up” White Paper
Live stream from the Hertsmere Local Plan committee room.
We grow old. We grow old. We will wear the bottom of our trousers rolled. And when a new white paper comes out, we will get seduced all over again. The razzle dazzle. The fanfare. The weirdly long departmental press releases (although if you thought that was long, well… wait until you saw the main event). The promises. So many promises. Even if some sound a bit… vague, you can’t quite ignore them. Because we’ve been told that reform of this merry business of town and country planning - the party that never stops - is now going to be “channelled through the levelling up prism”. Do you have the faintest idea what that means? Nor do I. But if we want to find out, presumably we have to read this blessed thing. Ah, the excitement. Refreshing your web browser waiting for that pdf to drop. And there it is! But then…
Did part of you get a lingering feeling? Something amiss? Something disappointing? Well, I did. And I’ll tell you what’s “off” for me. It’s that we have been here before, you and I. Recently. Many times, now. We’ve seen this merry go round spin. And what’s changed since those last few times? Nothing, really.
I suppose there’s one difference. I’m old enough to remember last time (i.e. the August 2020 “Planning for the Future” white paper). And at least that had ideas for big changes in the planning system that we could talk about. And talk we did. Changes which (for better and sometimes for worse) could’ve transformed our work. Ah, well. This time around (last month’s “Levelling Up” white paper) there’s next to nothing in its over 300 pages about planning reform. And certainly nothing new (see in particular pp.227-228).
Which is amazing. Given that this thing had pages to devote to every topic from the rise of the ancient city of Jericho, to how the Medici transformed medieval Florence, to the Great Depression. This is a paper with so very, very many words. But - at least for planners - so few ideas for change. A more strategic spatial geography for plan-making and decision-taking would - as we’ve talked about lots in these parts - be an excellent start. And that is the one thing which might give us just a little glimmer of hope. The proposed devolution framework with more combined mayoral authorities could become an engine for more strategic planning, and that could start delivering some positive outcomes if, where and when it actually happens. Which is tantilising. And positive. But the deeper critique of the planning system which led to the 2020 White Paper appears - at least for now - to have been filed in the drawer marked “maybe another time”.
Which is why, I suspect, it’s hard for many of us toiling away in the guts of the planning system to get excited about this Levelling Up white paper. We’d have to read the thing, for starters. And who has the time. Particularly so when we see that chunks of it were copied from Wikipedia, and that Michael Gove himself thinks the document can best be described using a particular 4-letter word. In the end, too much of it reads like a undergraduate thesis desperately padding things out to reach the required word count. And - call me an old cynic. Go on. I won’t mind. But if you had to produce a paper to define what is apparently the Government’s central mission but you were given no new money and scant new policies (because of that pesky lack of money)… I wonder. Might hiding behind a ridiculously long number of pages seem like a decent ruse? With the implied defence: how can our empty political slogan lack substance when this White Paper is so very, very long?
Anyway. Your regular reminder: we’re a year and half now since “Planning for the Future”, and the 44,000 consultees haven’t even had the pleasure of a response from Government. So more great fun to look forward to.
Of course, it was also hard to get excited about last month’s “housing delivery test” results because - as I explained last year around this time - they don’t mean much, and they have precious little effect in the areas of the country where housing is most desperately required.
That’s all very well. But, you may be thinking, what on earth has mattered for #planoraks this last month? Fair question. I’ll give you my take:
Come with me on a quick spin to the south-east. That part of England which, I suppose, is supposed to have already “levelled up”. Has it? Or maybe more accurate: the bit which is setting the level that other areas are upping to. Is that it? Who knows. Anyway. Beautiful Hertfordshire. Let’s start in Hertsmere where local members are now proposing to “shelve” a desperately needed local plan which has already been years in the making because… well, Green Belt. That’s why. I know that may sound reductive or glib. But that really is the gist of it. And the really close readers (yes, both of you) may be spotting a theme. After years of careful work by officers - after enormous amounts of public money put into an admirable draft plan… well, local politics did their work. The politics of the Green Belt. That most potent force against change. Playing out time after time after time in every corner of our country. With, most of the time, the same winners (people who already own a home) and the same losers (everyone else).
It’s the same story over the border into Welwyn Hatfield, where in its 5th year of examination (😬😬😬 - seriously, 5 years of examination - in what universe does that suggest a properly functioning system), members have now decided yet again to reject professional advice (including that of the examining inspector himself) on the true scale of their unmet housing needs. Because… well, Green Belt. In the end. Which may finally spell the end of this most troubled failure of a plan. Over the border again we go into St Albans, which is now saying they need until at least 2025 to adopt a plan, or even 2026. Which would come hot on the heels of its last plan - adopted in 1994. So you know… 30+ years. Why? Of course, St Albans is another authority washed over by Green Belt. It’s also an authority feeling the pinch of cuts to its planning department. As are so many.
I could go on [Please don’t, Ed.] That’s just 3 authorities in Hertfordshire. Add to them the spiralling list of Councils whose plans have recently been “paused” for no good reason to address non-changes to national planning policy which Boris never announced and which do not exist - e.g. Arun, Ashfield, Mid-Sussex. For more on all of that nonsense, see last year’s prized #planorak gong for worst article of the year.
With all that waste, all that politicising, all that systemic failure in our minds, we turn back to the Levelling Up White Paper, which tells us on page 227 that:
“Only 39% of local authorities have adopted a plan within the last five years, which limits effective community engagement about development. Local plans will be made simpler and shorter, and improved data that underpins plans will ensure that they are transparent, understandable and take into account the environment that will be developed. All of this will result in a system that is easier to engage with and works more efficiently, with communities having more of a say and more councils agreeing local plans.”
As Barak Obama used to say… come on, man. We know what the problem is, by now. It’s been the same problem for years. And years. Are you feeling old yet? But enough with this vague diagnosis. Enough with the platitudes. Enough soundbites. You want change? You want it this side of 2030 (the timeline proposed for levelling up in the White Paper)? Well, let’s start with some cold, hard cash for local authority planners, and to create the digital infrastructure which is going to make these simpler, shorter plans happen. Let’s put generic development management policies into the NPPF, and make local plans more visual and less verbose. And then add in proper incentives for Councils to plan, and a robust strategic spatial geography to stop self-interested local politicians dragging our system into reverse.
Because ours is a plan-led system (on which, more here). At least, it was supposed to be. But, friends: there’s a catch. Plan-led systems don’t work without plans. And, in many districts, our system somehow manages to reward local politicians who vote to stand in the way of progressing desperately needed new plans. At what cost? Nothing major. Just the future of our built environment, and that of our children. Until we make it in the interests of planning authorities to produce plans, we’ll be banging our heads against the same wall. Time after time after time. Which is why I found it difficult to get excited about the Levelling Up White Paper. But who knows. It maybe just because I’m getting old.
Soapbox moment done. Breathe in. Breathe out. I hope you’re doing well out there, #planoraks. And that, somehow, life is starting to tend back toward normal. In my home, we’re currently gearing up for child number 2 arriving in a few weeks (🤞🏻). So things are… how to put it… a long way from normal. It could be why I have plans on the brain (it could also be why I’m feeling so old!). In the meantime, stay well friends. And whatever else you do, through it all… #keeponplanning.
