Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Lord Whitty Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 25th June 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Whitty (Lab)]

My Lords, I am glad to follow the noble Baroness. I agreed with the first third of her speech. The latter part, however, I disagreed with. Less than 1% of agricultural land will be taken over by solar farms and similar sites. We need compulsory purchase to deliver some of our energy system. I therefore disagree with the latter part of her speech, but I agree with her on local control of housing developments and of other aspects of planning.

I will scrap the bulk of my speech. I will say what I agree with in the Bill, but I first appeal to my noble friends on the Front Bench, and to their colleagues, not to repeat all this stuff about blockers and builders, and not to give credence to saloon bar chat about frogs and newts preventing useful development. It was not frogs and newts that made a complete mess of a national infrastructure project such as HS2; nor is it frogs and newts—or even spiders—that are preventing us achieving our housebuilding targets.

I approve of the provisions in the Bill on providing easier access for national infrastructure, on energy and grid connections, on EV chargers and on electricity storage. However, I am dubious about much of the rest of it. Let me say something in defence of planners. The planning system is often too slow, and it is underresourced. There are bits of the Bill that attempt to address the underresourcing with the recruitment of better planners and better training for them.

Much of the countryside has been protected by the planning system. Had we not had a planning system since Lord Silkin in the 1940s we would have had urban sprawl, new modern slums, and much less protection of our natural resources and natural features. The planning system has its inadequacies, which we now have to address, but that does not mean we ought to dismantle it or make it more susceptible to the pressures.

As the noble Lord, Lord Best, said, the failure to meet housebuilding targets under successive Governments has nothing to do with the planning system itself. Indeed, the planning system has approved well over 80% of plans for housing. When there is an appeal, less than 3% of them are upheld by the appeals system. It is not the planning system that is preventing housebuilding but, as the noble Lord, Lord Best, said, the oligopolistic nature of the large housebuilders and the way they have squeezed out the competition there used to be with family building firms, and the lack of purchasing power from national and local public bodies. That is what needs to be addressed if we are to stand any chance of meeting our targets on housebuilding; it should not be an attack on planners.

The Government have written the net-zero strategy into their recent national industrial strategy and energy strategy. It is not written in to this Bill, nor are the contributions to tackling, slowing down and off-setting climate change. The protection of the countryside and of biodiversity, and reversing the biodiversity loss we have so tragically experienced in this country over recent decades, contribute to our tackling climate change. That needs to be put more explicitly in the Bill, as do the effects of climate change and our need to adapt to it. For example, why is there not a provision on not building in areas that are susceptible to flood or any pre-empting of much of the improvement in the water supply that we need to make?

I am sorry this has been slightly rambling. It is different from what I intended to say, but most of what I intended to say has been said. The most important message I give to my noble friends is: stop regarding those in the planning system as blockers; they are enablers of a better life.

Local Government: Funding

Lord Whitty Excerpts

Monday 27th January 2025 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Lord Whitty]

To ask His Majesty’s Government whether, before or alongside changes in local government structure in England, they will undertake a thorough review of the sources of funding, basis, and equity of local government financial resources at all levels, having regard to both the responsibility of individual councils and the balance of responsibility between central and local government.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (Baroness Taylor of Stevenage) (Lab)]

My Lords, before I answer my noble friend’s Question, I note that, 80 years ago this month, soldiers of the Soviet 60th Army of the First Ukrainian Front opened the gates of Auschwitz-Birkenau. It has been so moving today—Holocaust Memorial Day—to hear in our media the first-hand accounts of those who may be visiting Auschwitz for the last time. That infamous camp has become the symbol of the Shoah. Today, we remember the Jewish lives, and all lives, lost to genocide, and we remind ourselves that it is more important than ever to keep our humanity and respect for human dignity at the heart of all we do.

In answer to my noble friend: alongside our proposals to widen devolution and streamline local government structures, this Government are making good on their promise to reform and improve the local government funding system. From 2026, funding will be directed to where it is most needed, through the first multiyear settlement in a decade. By fixing the foundations, we will give better value for taxpayers and empower local government to provide high-quality services and support the delivery of the Government’s missions.

[Lord Whitty (Lab)]

My Lords, first, I am sure that the whole House endorses my noble friend’s opening words. It is indeed a moving day.

On my Question, the biggest problem for local authorities is not structure or assessment. This Government and every other Government depend on local authorities’ ability to deliver many of their most important policies and strategies, and yet local government depends on an archaic system of local taxation—both council tax and business tax—and uncertain grants from central government. I hope the assessment that my noble friend refers to will begin to change that system, but does my noble friend not agree that a fundamental assessment of what local authorities need should be introduced so that we can start to improve the financial position of local authorities before the end of this Parliament?

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend. For 12 of the last 14 years, I was a local government leader, so his words definitely strike home to me. The Government are committed to local authority funding reform, with the updated approach that I spoke about from 2026 to 2027. We need to fix the foundations that he spoke about, so this will be developed in partnership with the sector and based on the principle of giving councils early certainty of their funding and a much fairer funding picture across the country. We are inviting views on our principles and objectives for funding reform through a consultation. We want to do this in consultation with the sector, and that consultation closes on 12 February. We will move towards an updated system and possible transitional arrangements to determine how local authorities reach their new funding allocations.