Plan to make it easier for councils to seize land for housing
Councils are to be given greater powers to seize land, under government plans to boost housebuilding. The measure is part of the flagship Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is being introduced in Parliament later and aims to speed up building. Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook said he wanted greater use of compulsory purchase orders (CPOs), which allow public authorities to acquire land without the consent of the owner. Currently, councils buying sites through CPOs must factor in the "hope value" - the potential value if planning permission for development is secured - and this is set to be axed to allow land to be bought at a lower price.
However, rural campaign groups raised concerns farmers could be forced to sell at knock-down prices and that green spaces could be lost. Paul Miner, head of planning and policy at CPRE, the countryside charity, said the group supported the use of CPOs to build genuinely affordable homes on previously developed land.But he added: "Compulsory purchase shouldn't be used to enable the development of valued countryside and local green spaces."
Responding to such fears, Pennycook told BBC Radio 4's Today programme he was "somewhat mystified" by this interpretation, saying CPOs would be used "far more often" for regenerating brownfield - or previously developed - land."We think it's right these powers are more widely used and it will be for local authorities to make the decisions about what land is appropriate for those powers to be used on," he added. A requirement for the secretary of state to sign off on CPOs will be removed "in certain instances", he said, adding that the legislation would be "transformative" in unlocking construction for new homes, roads, rail and renewable energy projects. The bill also aims streamline the planning process, with more decisions made directly by officers rather than councillors.However, councils have raised concerns this could mean they will be shut out of the democratic planning process. Richard Clewer, housing and planning spokesperson at the Country Councils Network, said he welcomed changes to CPOs as a "useful tool".However, he said changes to the planning process could "dilute and bypass the role of councillors", particularly with rural developments where a few new homes could make a significant impact. Defending the plans, Pennycook said "expert planning officers" would support elected councillors with technical detail and allow councillors to focus on larger, more controversial applications.The government has promised to build 1.5 million new homes in England over the next five years, with the pledge key to boosting economic growth. However, the number of new homes continued to fall during the first six months that Labour was in power, with the construction industry warning the country does not have enough workers to deliver on the target. Pennycook said the inheritance from the previous Conservative government was "dire" but there were "very positive signs" and "green shoots coming forward" in the number of planning applications being submitted.
Other measures in the bill include:Up to £2,500 off energy bills for people living within 500m of new pylonsStreamlining the process for approving key projects like wind farms, roads or railways and banning multiple "meritless" legal challenges.Allowing "ready-to-go" energy projects to jump to the front of the queue for grid connections, replacing the current "first come, first served process" which the government says has clogged up the systemDeputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner said the plans would be "backing the builders" and "taking on the blockers" to create "the biggest building boom in a generation".
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
The battle of the Channel has been fought
Kemi Badenoch says the Conservative party will take a look at withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), freeing us at a leap and a bound from the tyranny of human rights lawyers. The Tory leader would give Britain the power to deter the cross-Channel influx of asylum seekers, by withdrawing protections from those arriving in Britain without papers. As there is unlikely to be a Conservative government in the foreseeable future, this announcement it's going to have no effect now, or any time soon, on the actual boats. And read the fine print: Badenoch hasn't really even made up her mind; she is going to set up a committee to look into it. In the real world, the boats aren't being stopped, the gangs aren't being smashed and the French judges and police are shrugging.
Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
Immigration is an economic imperative for Scotland
Liz McAreavey, CEO, Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce There is a growing recognition across Scotland's business community that immigration is not just a social or political issue – it is an economic imperative. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... For Edinburgh and the wider Scottish economy to thrive, we must embrace the reality that attracting and retaining international talent is essential to our future prosperity. There has been much debate in recent weeks about the merits of giving the Scottish Parliament devolved powers when it comes to setting immigration policy. Inevitably, that has become caught up in the ever-present constitutional argument. Scotland's demographic trends are clear: we have an ageing population and a declining birth rate. Edinburgh, while a vibrant and successful city, is not immune to these challenges. Over the next decade most of the population growth in Edinburgh and the Lothians is expected to come from people aged 65 and over – and by quite a large margin. At the same time, Edinburgh's birth rate is one of the lowest in the UK, which itself has a lower birth rate than many other countries. This creates a real challenge for our future workforce and economy. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The facts speak for themselves: to keep our economy growing, we need more people of working age. We need individuals who can support our essential public services, start new businesses and bring valuable skills into our workforce. The 2024 Edinburgh by Numbers report highlights this clearly. Between 2012 and 2022 the natural population change – births minus deaths – added just over 5700 people to Edinburgh's population. In contrast, net migration added more than 53,000. Migration isn't just helping to grow our population – it is the main driver behind it. Edinburgh is a city of opportunity. As outlined in our Call to Action, we have world-class strengths across a range of sectors including tech, health, the green economy, financial services and the creative industries. These are underpinned by strong enablers such as our vibrant visitor economy, excellent domestic and international connectivity, and a highly skilled workforce. But to maintain this momentum – and to drive good economic growth – we must ensure our population can support our economic ambitions. Other countries have successfully aligned immigration policy with regional economic needs offering useful models for Scotland. Canada is a strong example. While the federal government sets overall immigration targets, provinces have the flexibility to tailor programmes that address their specific labour market demands. Through the Provincial Nominee Programs (PNP), provincial governments can attract economic migrants with the skills and experience needed in their regions. For instance, Alberta has a scheme that encourages immigration to smaller rural communities facing labour shortages. In British Columbia, the Tech Pilot programme fast-tracks immigration for technology professionals to meet the needs of its growing digital sector. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad These models show the value of a collaborative approach between national and regional governments – one that enables targeted, responsive immigration strategies. Crucially, they are supported by integrated data systems that track and monitor migration flows. The UK already has tools, such as the digitised National Insurance system, that could support a similar approach here. With the right infrastructure and political will, we could adopt a more flexible, regionally responsive immigration system – one that supports Scotland's specific economic needs and helps unlock our full potential. The time has come for a mature, constructive conversation about how we manage immigration in a way that supports our economic ambitions. We need our governments – at all levels – to work together to find practical, forward-looking solutions. Liz McAreavey is Chief Executive, Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
The radio debut of the House of Commons: ‘there could be a long-running series here' – archive, 1975
Permanent radio broadcasts from the House of Commons began on 3 April 1978, and from the House of Lords on 4 April. Television broadcasts began on 21 November 1989. 10 June 1975 Ed Boyle, the commercial radio commentator for the first broadcast of parliament, yesterday spent two hours cooped up in a tiny glass box at a temperature of nearly 90 degrees, wearing a jacket, tie, and buttoned up collar, suffering from a particularly ferocious type of dysentery which has already brought his weight down to eight stone. Just to add a touch of challenge to the job, he was operating a new type of microphone kindly supplied by the BBC with operating instructions entirely in Japanese. In spite of this, Mr Boyle and his BBC colleague, David Holmes, who were trapped together in the same tiny glass box, managed somehow to give composed and informative account of the proceedings. Mr Holmes admitted afterwards that the heat had been so great that at times he had thought he would not be able to carry on, and though listeners may have noticed his voice fading occasionally, he always remained strikingly coherent and apparently in command. Mr Boyle now intends to make a few swift changes to make life slightly more bearable. Apart from sartorial changes to Bermuda shorts, for himself, he plans to make commentating easier by fading out some members when the discussion gets too technical. 'Some of the questions are really on very minor and erudite issues, and I guess the MPs won't mind if we turn them down occasionally so as to explain to the listeners what is happening.' Yesterday the two broadcasters were blessed by a good chunk of pungent topical debates, with Tony Benn using industry questions as the chance to prove himself a good Euro-democrat, and with splendid quotations like: 'If the opposition wants any head on a charger, the leader of the Conservative party will have to be a lot more seductive as a Salome than she has been so far.' At the same time, there were highly complex questions about, for example, the funding of the new pod for the stretched version of the Rolls-Royce RB 211 – a matter of great importance, but one which cannot be explained in the few seconds between question and answer. Both commentators had to trim down their remarks to within a second or so either way: Mr Holmes reckoned that if he did not spot immediately whether the speaker was calling an MP for a supplementary or for the next question on the order paper, he would lose two of the four or five vital seconds of explaining time. Time was so tight that Mr Boyle had to make a definite policy decision to give the first name of each MP as well as his surname and party. Often their time was so limited they could only say: 'This is a question about Europe' or, 'This is about British Leyland.' Mr Holmes hopes to grab a few more seconds of talking time while MPs are laughing and cheering between answers. But both men were pleased with the way things had gone, and came out of the box easier in mind if not in body than they had been when they went in. 'What's encouraging is that it looks as if we can do a proper job without the house having to change its way of going about business or even the tempo of its debates, so no one need feel that we are interfering in any way,' said Mr Holmes. The commercial company plans to use more material than the BBC will use, with prime minister's questions live every Tuesday and Thursday, plus special debates. It will also have an hour of extracts and highlights each morning – twice as long as the BBC – with an instant feedback service from a panel of MPs who took part in the debate; and possibly a Saturday morning edition giving chunks of the week's committees. Val Arnold-Forster, our radio critic, adds: It was a lucky day for broadcasters, according to David Holmes at the end of the transmission – audibly breathing a sigh of relief. It was too, it was a well or luckily chosen parliamentary day. At first, both Holmes and his opposite number, Ed Boyle of IRN, seemed to feel a trifle defensive about parliament. Well they might, for BBC listeners anyway missed not only some of Woman's Hour and a play, but since political events always seem to invade children's entertainment, they also missed Listen with Mother. Before the actual live broadcast started, both political editors showed us round like keen members of a parent-teachers association displaying their school: eager to tell us about the hallowed tradition, the problems that the whole institution had in a changing society, and the usefulness of the work done. The leader of the house, Edward Short, appeared on both channels in his headmasterly capacity to say that this was a particularly noisy House of Commons, but he hoped that the MPs would be on their best behaviour. A bit unruly, he thought, and not only the MPs either. There would have been more room, said Mr Short, in the tiny broadcaster's box if IRN and BBC had done the decent thing and agreed to a joint transmission. Nobody need have worried: from the moment question time started we were in capable hands. Both David Holmes and Ed Boyle chipped into the debate sotto voce, to identify and give party allegiances and explanations. Both tried valiantly to feed the listener with the details that make the House of Commons come alive. 'Mr Bidwell, chairman of the Tribune Group … Mr Denis Skinner, always a lively performer … Mr Benn is smiling to himself.' But they need not really have bothered: the proceedings were jolly enough. For those of us used to hearing politicians debating cautiously in front of untried audiences or answering laboured questions and phone-ins, it was an entertaining experience to hear such skilful parliamentary technicians as Harold Wilson and Tony Benn, parrying questions, riposting, joking, and scolding. The jokes were not always very good, but that's true of other radio comedians. Perhaps the laughter and applause sometimes seemed excessive but the barbed retorts were well placed and, as in other radio shows, what seemed like impromptu repartee must have been rehearsed, if only in the bath. 'I do not require lessons in political morality from an honourable member who regularly signs the oath of allegiance and snipes continually at the royal family,' snapped Tony Benn to Willie Hamilton. The uproar which worried Edward Short was cheerful mostly. The general cosiness, which came through strikingly as everyone complimented everyone else on performances in the referendum debate, seemed as easy to grasp as the Archers: we could become as familiar with William Whitelaw's idiosyncrasies as Walter Gabriel's. Final verdict: early days yet, but there could be a compulsive, long-running series here.
