The petition of residents of Redbourn and the surrounding area,
Declares that Redbourn village faces large-scale development proposals driven by national planning law pushing development onto green and grey-belt land; further declares that government policy is having a detrimental impact on Redbourn village’s character and environment.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to schedule a debate in the House of Commons on the Government review of the National Planning Policy Framework and how villages like Redbourn can be protected from over-development , and local communities given real power over planning decisions and infrastructure provision that affect the lives of village residents.
And the petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Victoria Collins , Official Report, 24 March 2026; Vol. 783, c. 272.]
[P003178]
Observations from the Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook):
The Government have a brownfield-first approach to development. The National Planning Policy Framework makes clear that substantial weight should be given to the value of using suitable brownfield land within settlements, including the development of under-utilised land and buildings to meet the need for homes and other uses.
Through the revisions made to the NPPF on 12 December 2024, we broadened the definition of brownfield land, set a strengthened expectation that applications on brownfield land will be approved, and made clear that plans should promote an uplift in density in urban areas.
Between 16 December 2025 and 10 March 2026, the Government consulted on a new NPPF. That consultation, which can be found on gov.uk, included a range of policies to further strengthen support for development on brownfield land. We are currently analysing the feedback received and will publish our response in due course.
The Government are committed to preserving green belts that have served England’s towns and cities well over many decades, not least in terms of checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas and preventing neighbouring towns from merging into one another.
However, we know that there are simply not enough sites on brownfield land registers to deliver the volume of homes that the country needs each year, let alone enough that are viable and in the right location. That is why we acted to replace the haphazard approach taken to green-belt designation and release by the previous Government with a strategic and targeted approach.
We have not changed the five purposes of the green belt set out in paragraph 143 of the NPPF, and we do not propose to alter its general extent. Relevant green-belt guidance makes clear that when assessing contribution to these purposes, “large built-up areas” and “towns” do not include villages. Considering whether any particular settlement constitutes a village is a matter for the given local planning authority to judge, which may be informed by the adopted local settlement hierarchy.
The framework still contains strong protections for the green belt, making it clear that inappropriate development should not be approved unless justified by very special circumstances. Where it is necessary to release green-belt land for development, national policy makes clear that local development plans must take a sequential approach: first exhaust previously developed land, then consider low-quality grey-belt land that is not previously developed, and only then consider other green-belt locations. Under our revised approach, the sustainability of green-belt sites must also be prioritised, and local planning authorities must pay particular attention to transport connections when considering whether grey belt is sustainably located.
The definition of grey belt, for the purposes of plan making and decision making, is provided in the glossary of the NPPF. We published updated green-belt guidance on 27 February 2025, to ensure a consistent approach to the identification of grey-belt land. Where land is identified as grey belt, that does not mean it is automatically granted planning permission. The potential consequences of any planning proposal should still be assessed in light of all relevant local and national policies.
Where green-belt land has to be released for major housing development, we have put in place new golden rules to ensure that development delivers higher levels of affordable housing; the provision of new or improvements to existing green spaces that are accessible to the public; and the making of necessary improvements to local or national infrastructure.
The draft NPPF continues to make clear that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, by managing the use and development of land in the long-term public interest. The NPPF promotes positive plan making by expecting development plans to meet the development needs of their area while providing for the improvement of the environment and seeking to mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects.
We believe that communities must remain at the heart of the plan-making process, and that local people must have a meaningful say on planning policies that will affect them and their local areas. We want to encourage open dialogue between authorities, communities and other key stakeholders such as statutory bodies about key local decisions and trade-offs, to help influence the production of genuinely local plans at the earliest stages of plan making.