Manchester is home to many iconic people, cultures and bands, but also a political movement. It’s the birthplace of The Smiths, Oasis, The Stone Roses, the Busby Babes, and Andy Burnham’s political identity, Manchesterism. Now has this ‘Manchesterism’ had any effect on the new NPPF?
It feels like with every new NPPF update the Government finds new ways to encourage development, unlock investment and squeeze any economic growth they can out of a sector that is keen to deliver, but which has faced difficulties in the last 10 years, with costs for development rising each year.
The Government now has Angela Rayner back at the helm of the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government, following her year on the backbenches after failing to pay the correct tax on one of her properties. So, with Rayner back in charge of the building ‘reins’, will we see any change in direction of Government policy? Well, if this NPPF is anything to go by, the Government is doubling down. The direction of Government continues to be focused on unlocking development across the UK in order to generate the economic growth the UK needs.
Growth is now no longer just a desirable by-product of development; it’s a strategic goal. Even the most stringent NIMBY may look at residential development and see the benefits it may bring to a select group of people who buy those homes, and even the most pro-growth YIMBY may struggle to name the direct benefits for local residents of a giga-data centre. These projects now receive special recognition for the role they can play in generating economic growth for the wider UK economy.
The new NPPF is effectively asking decision-makers to look beyond that immediate local impact, with ‘substantial weight’ being given to the wider economic benefits. This is a new shift in planning policy, with the argument around development becoming increasingly not just “What does this give the people living next door?”, but also “What does the country lose if we don’t build it?”.
Now this development does come with restrictions, and does not amount to growth at any cost. Planning considerations such as environmental impacts, heritage and design are still within the NPPF, but it does mean that those opposing development may increasingly have to overcome a much more explicit NPPF where the national and regional ‘good’ itself carries substantial planning weight.
Another part of the new NPPF that has gained significant recent media attention is the policy to have a ‘default yes’ position for new homes around well-connected train stations. However, the big issue is this: this isn’t actually a new announcement. This policy was first announced back in November last year. What is new, though, is that the new policy has gone further than originally planned. Identified suitable housing within reasonable walking distance of well-connected stations will now have a ‘default yes’ position and there will now be minimum density expectations with the aim of maximising the use of land around these key transport hubs.
All in all, Andy Burnham may wear different clothes, have a different accent and bring a different approach to politics, but when it comes to development and real estate, the direction of travel from the new UK Government feels remarkably familiar. If anything, the new administration led by Andy Burnham wants to push the pro-development agenda even further.
The language being used may be more Mancunian and the politics may be packaged differently, but the overarching message to the property industry is the same: Build more, unlock investment and use development as the engine room for national growth. As another famous Mancunian, Liam Gallagher, says, “As you were”.
Angela Rayner ©House of Commons
Blog by Greg Ford
