Lords slam ministers over shortage of town planners

Posted byCambridge Town OwlPosted inUncategorized

While the Commons is on half term, the House of Lords debated the crisis in town planning.

I should declare an interest in this in that both of my brothers are qualified town planners – and I spent part of my time in the civil service working on both housing/planning policy on sustainable new homes, and a brief stint in planning casework dealing with the delights that are appeals against Tree Preservation Orders.

Great Cambridge Crash Course – New events!

I’m adding some more dates in the near future, but I can confirm the following two will be in the 3rd Floor Conference Room at the Cambridge Central Library (next to the Cambridgeshire Collection) from 11am on the following dates:

As before, these are free/donations (the rooms cost over £50 to hire for the two hours so donations are gratefully received to help cover this and the print outs for participants)

The branch libraries are much cheaper to book but given distances (I don’t drive) the only accessible one for me at the moment is Rock Road Library. However, they are ideal for small discussion events so do have a look if you want to run your own community event on things like local history to the future of our city and county. If you need a guide to refer to on running a discussion, see the following:

Both are still relevant to today despite their age.

And if you are short of topics, have a browse through the guides by the Great-Shelford-based Independence Educational Publications. 

Town Planning and the shortage of town planners

The debate took place in the House of Lords on Mon 12 February 2024 and you can watch the whole debate here. Alternatively, you can read the transcript of who said what here.

The issues/highlights raised:

“…given that staffing has reduced by 25% in the last nine years, does she feel that staffing of planning departments is adequate to not only deal with planning applications but with the new responsibilities around biodiversity net gain and providing local plans?”

Lord Crisp (Cross-bencher) to Baroness Penn – Minister at DLUHC

“when the Government made that increase [in planning application fees] they knew that it would not cover the costs of planning applications. Can the Minister justify why hard-pressed councils have to take funding from other public services to pay for planning applications?”

Baronness Pinnock (LibDems)

“Does my noble friend the Minister agree that, if local authorities had the ability to set their own planning fees, they would be in a far better position to recruit more planning officers, compete more efficiently with the private sector and deliver the housing of the future?“

Baroness Eaton (Cons)

“…given the clear impression that local authorities do not have the resources to draw up a robust local plan at the moment—this can be rectified only over time—and, even worse, that they do not have the resources to defend a local plan when it is challenged by speculative proposals on appeal, what does the Minister suggest for current issues around water and nutrient neutrality and biodiversity net gain…?

Earl of Lytton (Cross Bench)

“Do the Government have any concerns about the quality of the planners whom a local authority can recruit, given that the private sector will seek to poach many of the brightest and best?”

Lord Anderson (Lab)

“Can His Majesty’s Government have any influence on the training of planners so that they understand the word “beauty” and do not allow such grotesque buildings in London? They are so high, dominating the river, and they destroy the heritage and history of our wonderful capital city.”

Baroness Hoey (Non-affiliated)

I link these back to this list of ten suggestions to take the heat out of planning by Nick Lee. In summary:

  1. We need a proper national development framework with a spatial dimension.
  2. Planning has to be seen as being as part of the chief executive’s department at council level
  3. Proper spatial planning at city region or other logical scale needs to return
  4. Local councils must then implement their required level
  5. Local councils must have a penalty for not preparing a local plan.
  6. Local councils should have fully trained members only on planning committees
  7. If members are to go against officer advice…appeals should start with default being in favour of overturning refusal
  8. Developers need to think differently about how they engage with the public.
  9. A proper ‘social impact’ test needs to be brought into developments that addresses specific, known local needs beyond housing alone – for example, doctors, schools, etc
  10. The local plan preparation process should absorb neighbourhood plans.

At the end of my blogpost here I also listed a series of conditions that needed to be attached to the above – such as properly resourcing local government.

Did the House of Lords cover most of the issues raised above?

Given the question/debate was about the shortage of town planners, there is only so much they would have been able to cover. Furthermore, some of the issues go beyond the department responsible for town planning – such as the provision of schools, hospitals, and public transport networks.

Whether we will see anything substantial on the training of town planners and also the education of the public on the essentials of town planning – perhaps as part of a wider civics/citizenship programme for communities and lifelong learning functions, remains to be seen. I hope it is something the public will be willing and able to raise at public debates and election hustings throughout the year.

Food for thought?

If you are interested in the longer term future of Cambridge, and on what happens at the local democracy meetings where decisions are made, feel free to:

Leave a comment