Neighbourhood Planning Bill

Debate between Fiona Bruce and James Heappey

3rd reading: House of Commons & Legislative Grand Committee: House of Commons & Report stage: House of Commons
Tuesday 13th December 2016 Commons Chamber

[Fiona Bruce]

That is what I am saying. Time and again, our constituents are being encouraged to produce neighbourhood plans. About two years ago, my hon. Friend the Member for Grantham and Stamford (Nick Boles), then a Minister in the Department for Communities and Local Government, came at my invitation to Sandbach town hall to talk to residents concerned about the barrage of applications by developers to build thousands of houses across my constituency. He said that the way to protect our local communities was by developing neighbourhood plans. That galvanised communities such as those that I have mentioned into working towards neighbourhood plans. As others have said, some residents have put hundreds of hours into doing so.

[James Heappey]

My hon. Friend describes a situation that I am sure we all recognise well. In my experience, many local communities engage positively with their neighbourhood and local plans to identify the housing need in their area, and then plan accordingly. Does she share my frustration, however, that because of the robust protections afforded to the Bristol and Bath green belt to the north of my constituency, despite my communities having made plans in Somerset, much of the former’s housing demand is being displaced southwards, so we end up having to absorb that as well, outwith our planning?

[Fiona Bruce]

I do very much empathise with my hon. Friend’s concerns.

Another resident says that unless neighbourhood plans are given significant weight—that is what I and many colleagues have asked the Minister to ensure—their community

“would advise others not to put the time and effort into what is increasingly looking like a futile and wasteful exercise”.

Another resident pointed out that the factsheet I referred to states, in response to the question,

“should a community produce a neighbourhood plan where the Local Plan may not be up-to-date?”,

that through

“a neighbourhood plan, communities can have a real say about local development…and protect important local green spaces”.

It also states that

“the NPPF is very clear that where a planning application conflicts with a neighbourhood plan that has been brought into force, planning permission should not normally be granted (NPPF para. 198)”.

Contradictorily, in the case of Brereton, the inspector’s report allowing the appeal for these 190 houses stated:

“Reference was made to paragraph 198 of the Framework, which provides that where a planning application conflicts with a neighbourhood plan (as in this case)”—

he acknowledged that—

“that has been brought into force, planning permission should not normally be granted”.

So far, so good. It goes on to say:

“However, the position is not ‘normal’ in that as NP policy HOU01 is clearly a relevant policy for the supply of housing, and is in conformity with LP policies which are themselves out of date”—

meaning there is no current neighbourhood plan—

“only limited weight can be afforded to the policy”.