John Prescott
With permission Madam Speaker, I should like to make a statement about national planning guidance for housing and about regional planning guidance for the South East.
Honourable Members will have seen press reports relating to this statement over the weekend. Much of what was reported has already been announced to the House, but I regret and denounce the leaks and as I have said to you, Madam Speaker, I am doing all I can to prevent them.
Madam Speaker, I am today putting in place policies, which will radically alter the way in which we build new homes in this country.
I want to see an end to the wasteful, badly located and poorly designed house building which has gone on over the last 20 years.
New housing developments can be well designed, attractive, well located and sustainable places to live. They do not have to take up endless acres of our beautiful countryside.
We have already set out a clear set of principles, in my statement to the House on 'Planning for the Communities of the Future' in February 1998. Let me remind the House of these.
Everyone should have the opportunity of a decent home.
- We want to see thriving communities in our towns and cities - what Lord Rogers calls an Urban Renaissance.
- Our housing plans should support sustainable economic growth in all our regions.
- We need to make efficient use of land. Land is a finite and precious resource which we must conserve wherever possible.
- We must respect our countryside. That is why we have set a national target that 60% of new homes should use recycled land or buildings. This compares to the last Government's target of 50%.
- Finally, we must seek to reduce car dependence by facilitating more walking and cycling and improve access between housing, jobs, local services and local amenities by planning for mixed use.
Madam Speaker, I am today publishing our new Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 on Housing and our response to the Environment Transport and Regional Affairs Select Committee's Report on the draft guidance note.
Today's new planning guidance for England is not just for individuals, but for thriving communities. Important changes in lifestyles are taking place in England and throughout Europe which are leading to an increase in households. No-one is asking members of the public to change their existing home.
But new homes for additional households must provide the variety and choice to meet the needs of the future. I want to emphasise to the House that 70% of new households over the next 20 years will be single person households.
Some of these will be youngsters setting up home.
Some will be people living independently of their families.
Some will be elderly people living longer.
They will not all want, or be able to afford, executive houses in the countryside. Many will need well-designed, well-located homes for rent or to buy which are affordable and which give them a range of choice and a better quality of life.
We must therefore plan for these changes.
First of all, the new sequential approach which is central to our new Guidance means that planning authorities must in future give preference to recycling previously developed sites and empty properties. Brownfield first, greenfield last.
Second we must make more efficient use of land if we are to preserve our countryside and make the best use of spare capacity in our towns.
Third, housing must be more affordable. Too many developments make no provision for people on modest incomes.
We will enable local authorities to secure a proportion of affordable housing in larger housing developments - both in urban and rural areas. This will benefit many single people, low-income families and key workers such as nurses, teachers and others.
Finally, we must promote mixed use developments. This will integrate housing with shops, local services, transport and jobs sustainable communities, not just bricks and mortar.
Madam Speaker, these are policies which will apply throughout all the Regions of England. Regional Planning Guidance will put these principles into practice.
The first of the Regional Planning Guidance will be for the South East of England. Others will follow in due course.
The South East is relatively well-off. But it lags behind the most prosperous European regions. And just like other regions, there are significant areas of unemployment and deprivation within London and the South East itself.
This Government, unlike the last, is determined to see a fairer share in the benefits of growth both between and within regions. One reason we have established Regional Development Agencies in England's regions is to tackle such disparities.
While I am on this subject, can I just lay to rest one myth perpetuated by the Opposition today and repeated by the BBC. Let there be no doubt, the demand for additional housing in the South East is not the result of massive North-South migration. It is mainly the result of migration within the South East, in particular from London to surrounding towns and villages.
Madam Speaker, in deciding how many additional homes need to be provided, I have had to weigh very carefully the different views presented to me.
Local authorities in the South East - known collectively as SERPLAN - proposed up to 718,000 additional homes outside London, over 20 years.
These proposals were examined in Public by a Panel led by Professor Stephen Crow which concluded that provision should be made for 1.1 million additional homes outside London.
All governments have to make judgements on strategic issues like this.
SERPLAN were understandably concerned about the number of new homes to be built in the South East.
But they failed to take account of future housing needs. They did not make provision for affordable housing or account for the growth of single person households. And they assumed the same wasteful use of land as in the recent past.
The Crow Panel, for their part, applied a rigid 'predict and provide' approach. And they didn't pay enough attention to the capacity of London and the South East to absorb and plan for growth sustainably.
I believe we must take a different approach. I shall consult local authorities in the South East on the basis that they should plan, monitor and manage housing provision in their region.
First they should plan to provide 43,000 additional dwellings a year outside London, subject to regular review no less than every 5 years.
Under the old 20 year 'predict and provide' system, it is clear that 43,000 homes adds up to 860,000 new homes.
But we have moved away from a 20 year plan to our new plan, monitor and manage approach. No-one can with certainty predict how many extra households will exist in 20 years' time.
Our benchmark of 43,000 a year is approximately 10% more than the current rate of construction in the South East. Professor Crow implied a 40% increase.
Based on the advice of the London Planning Advisory Committee, London should plan to provide 23,000 new homes a year, the vast majority of which will be on brownfield sites. That is a 22% increase on current build rates and is, I believe, accepted by all parties.
So local authorities should plan for this level of building.
Second, planning authorities should monitor against a series of indicators.
Third, they should manage, and if necessary adjust, the rate of development in the light of monitoring. In addition I propose that 60% of all new homes in the South East should be provided on brownfield sites.
I am determined that we should take as little greenfield land as is necessary to provide the new homes that will be needed. Compared with Professor Crow our proposals will save 42 square miles of countryside enough to build a city the size of Manchester.
Our proposals will provide homes for more people, but because of our policies for less land-take, they will use no more land than SERPLAN proposals.
Our new guidance makes clear that the Thames Gateway will remain a focus for development. I pay tribute to the Rt Hon Member for Henley for his vision of a thriving Thames Gateway.
Under our plans, which will include an extension of the Thames Gateway area and new delivery mechanisms, the Thames Gateway will become a hub for development and regeneration with fast links to London and Europe.
After brownfield development, the most sustainable greenfield option is to build town extensions.
In the South East I therefore propose that we should investigate the potential for high quality, well-planned development in two main areas Milton Keynes and Ashford in Kent. I want to emphasise that this will all be subject to further studies which will be taken into account in the next review of planning guidance.
For the longer term, consideration will also be given to the possibility of growth in the M11 corridor, including Stansted.
Madam Speaker, I believe my statement today strikes the right balance between competing demands.
We are proposing the most radical changes since the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act.
The old 'predict and provide' approach to housing which under the Tories gave us urban sprawl, out-of-town shopping and pepper-pot development is dead.
We have adopted a new, more flexible approach which will conserve greenfield land and improve the quality and design of housing developments.
It provides for good quality housing, good design and a range of choice which meets people's needs. I commend these proposals to the House.
« Previous Article - Next Article »
source, date