top of page

The English Devolution White Paper: What will it mean for town and parish council plans?

Neil Homer

The Government published its ‘English Devolution White Paper’ last December. As a ‘White Paper’  its contents are not published for consultation but as a statement of intent for future legislation and policy.

 

Houses back onto a canal and path in cheshire
Going down the right path? English Devolution is a mixed picture with significant opportunities for town and parish councils to take on new community facilities and engage in plan-making for their local area.

The Paper has received a lot of attention from those inside and engaged with the different tiers of local government as some of its proposals are far reaching. Many will change the way the planning system operates and some will have a direct effect on the way town and parish councils (TPC) engage with plan making and development management processes.

 

We think there are four proposals that will drive a change in that engagement:

 

  1. A programme of local government reorganisation for areas where there are multiple layers of local government, and for unitary authorities (UA) where there is evidence of failure or where their size or boundaries may be hindering their ability to deliver sustainable and high-quality public services. New UAs that replace all remaining district/borough councils will normally have a population of 500,000 or more.

  2. All areas, with or without a Strategic Authority, will have to produce a Spatial Development Strategy (SDS). Authority Mayors will also be given new development management powers. This will include the ability to call in planning applications of strategic importance.

  3. Provisions to enhance protections for community assets and high streets, including strengthening communities with greater rights to be involved in their local issues, as well as delivering a new community ‘right to buy’ for valued community assets, such as empty shops, pubs and community spaces. And a commitment to work with the TPC sector to improve engagement between them and local authorities.

  4. Strategic Authorities will have a strategic role in the delivery of the Great British Energy Local Power Plans, delivering local sustainable energy generation. They will also have a role in the wider energy system, delivering our transition to Net Zero, become the zoning co-ordinators for local heat networks. And they will lead Local Nature Recovery Strategies.

 

Both NALC and SLCC have generally welcomed the proposals and we agree that although there could be downsides, with careful positioning by the TPC sector the changes could create many better opportunities. From a planning system perspective, we think the sector’s success will be measured by how devolution will:

  • improve spatial decision making through a plan-led system at the very local level and

  • improve the ability of local communities to engage in strategic planning

 

Without doubt, the most profound change will be the abolition of district/borough councils and the merging of their planning authority functions to new Unitary Authorities (UAs). What we do know is that although there have been fears that new councils will make decision making more remote from communities, there is a strong correlation between those established UAs (outside metropolitan areas) and hotspots of neighbourhood planning activity, e.g. Cornwall, Herefordshire and Cheshire.

 

In some cases, this has been fostered by enthusiastic councils recognising the risk to local planning and likely accepting devolving plan making to the lowest level saves considerable time and money. In others, TPCs themselves have filled the vacuum in active plan making and engagement in the absence of any real interest by the new higher tier body.

 

In these areas neighbourhood plans have played a vital role in maintain the currency of the plan led system as the planning authorities have struggled to keep up with national change and demands. And they have also enabled communities to engage more effectively in Local Plan making (and in development management decisions on planning applications and with appeals). Some have led to communities having the knowledge and confidence to go further and play a part in securing as well as protecting community assets.

 

At ONH, we have worked for TPCs in 12 UA areas and in more than 50 district/borough councils areas on neighbourhood plan and other planning matters since 2012. Five of these UAs have been in London, which is cited in the Paper as the inspiration for much of the thinking on Strategic Authorities and new Mayors. We are well placed to judge the strengths and weaknesses of UAs and to spot trends in their behaviour towards very local planning. And to see how plan making has operated in a new-style three tier area – Strategic Authority (the GLA), UA and Neighbourhood Forums (in the general absence of TPCs in London specifically).

 

Based on that experience, we offer these insights to Government; established and prospective UAs; and to TPCs and their representative bodies:

  • district/borough planning authorities have typically found it more difficult to embrace very local planning as they have been too big to be very local as well, but too small to be genuinely strategic (themselves and with others)

  • some have seen the TPC sector as a threat to their democratic legitimacy and allowed historic political baggage to get in the way of opportunities to collaborate and share resources for mutual plan making benefit

  • some have been reluctant to devolve and encourage plan making, or been less willing or able to support neighbourhood plan making, and these behaviours have continued despite their officer numbers and budgets being in sharp decline over the last decade

  • others have wholly embraced neighbourhood planning and devolution to TPCs

  • UAs have inherited planning teams and the culture of their former authorities, which have normally led to their behaviours being little different in their early years but over time their resource constraints (as efficiency savings do not always materialise) and geographical and perceived remoteness has left them little alternative but to change tack

  • Not surprisingly, UAs have tended to focus their attention on strategic settlement planning leaving rural settlements neglected with insufficient policy nuance, both of which have stifled some neighbourhood plans

  • A key reason why neighbourhood planning has struggled to take off in London is the scarcity of planning policy space for them to occupy, especially as the recent versions of the London Plan have contained greater spatial and development policy detail than before, resulting in the UAs not wanting to get squeezed out of the middle with that Plan above pushing down and neighbourhood plans below pushing up – is there the same danger for new UAs?

  • With scarce resources likely for the foreseeable future UAs may prioritise engagement in SDS making and argue there is little point investing in new Local Plans until that job is done, despite Government discouraging this, or having only enough time for those Local Plans to focus on spatial strategy and large-scale allocations

  • It therefore seems inevitable that the finite UA policy officer resource, even if it stabilises at its current level, will be spread even thinner than now, and will be required to collaborate on new SDSs and operate the new Local Plan process in a fraction of the time most have taken over the last few years

 

Someone in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government may know the data as well as we do and let the new Government know that it was pushing out an open door in retaining neighbourhood planning, rather than abolishing it as was proposed by its Planning Commission back in 2020.

 

Despite considerable (ill-informed) developer backlash, §14 in the new National Planning Policy Framework is a rare survival from the 2023 iteration (read our thoughts on the Dec 2024 NPPF). With a decision likely in February on a new neighbourhood planning financial support programme and grants for 2025 – 2028, the future for neighbourhood planning seems brighter than for some time - particularly for those plans that choose to allocate housing.

 

More than that, we find it difficult to see how the Government’s devolution or planning ambitions could possibly work without TPCs willing to take on the devolution of assets and good quality neighbourhood planning allocating smaller sites (as appropriate to each area), purely on a pragmatic level. Statements about wanting to engage communities on planning issues when and where it matters most make this more clear - TPCs should take this as a key opportunity to create effectively and locally centered neighbourhood plans at a pivotal moment in planning across the UK.

 

We have just spent two days at the SLCC Practitioners Conference - more on that later - but for now, we'll say that after conversations with dozens of Clerks, the sector is ready and preparing for change, and we're ready to help. Contact us to find out more about how we can support your planning projects.




Comments


Commenting has been turned off.
bottom of page