Councils 'don't have resources' to force developers to build roads and schools
Councils don't have the resources to make sure developers of new homes are paying enough towards local services, a damning government report claims.
Housebuilders can be required to pay money towards infrastructure such as new roads, schools and doctors' surgeries as a condition of their planning permission.
They may also be told to fund the building of affordable housing.
However, public spending watchdog the National Audit Office has said the system isn't working properly because under-funded local planning authorities often don't have the resources or skills to stand up to developers.
In a report published today, it said: 'Current policy is not reliably delivering the infrastructure funding required for new developments.
'Local planning authorities are stretched, both in terms of finances and skills, meaning they are often unable to effectively challenge developers.'
The local planning authority is usually part of the council, apart from on very large developments where responsibility might be handed over to a body such as the Greater London Authority.
Councils' funding is handed out by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Most are facing significant financial pressures thanks to funding cuts in recent years and the rising cost of providing services.
The NAO report went on to say that experienced staff from planning departments were leaving councils for the private sector because they were unhappy with the 'working environment, caseloads and pay.'
It also noted that developers could afford to employ professional negotiators and consultants, giving them an upper hand.
'There is an imbalance in capacity and capability between the public and private sector, and larger developers generally have access to specialist negotiating skills,' the report said.
'Some local planning authorities rely on external consultants to provide expertise, but there are perceived conflicts of interest, as consultants sometimes work both for local planning authorities and developers.'
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Conservative member of parliament and chair of the influential Public Accounts Committee of MPs, said: 'An effective and efficient system of obtaining contributions from developers is essential to providing local infrastructure, such as schools and health facilities, and delivering on Government's commitment to build 1.5 million homes over this Parliament.
'The NAO report highlights that issues around skills and capacity in planning authorities mean that too often the developers are favoured at the expense of local communities.'
The Government says it has launched several programmes to help make the system more effective, including initiatives to enhance the skills of local planners, and to assist new housing schemes that are progressing too slowly.
What do housebuilders have to pay councils?
There are two main ways local planning authorities can get developers to contribute to amenities.
Section 106 agreements can be drawn up between the council and the developer to help fund affordable homes. In 2023 to 2024, about 27,000 or 44 per cent of affordable homes built were paid for in this way.
However, once built the homes must be sold to organisations such as housing associations which will manage them in the long term.
As of October 2024, around 17,400 affordable homes remained unsold to according to a Home Builders Federation survey.
In December 2024, MHCLG launched a service to match up buyers and sellers of affordable housing funded through Section 106.
Developers can challenge the amount they are being asked to pay in a Section 106 if they can provide a financial assessment proving that it would make the development unviable.
The NAO report said that local authorities found it hard to challenge these objections because of a 'lack of transparency, limited expertise, and the ability of larger developers to use consultants to reduce their contribution obligations.'
The second funding method is by getting developers to pay something called a Community Infrastructure Levy.
This can be used for things like roads and schools, but not for housing. Just over half of local planning authorities use these.
Cllr Adam Hug, housing and planning spokesperson for the Local Government Association, which represents councils, said: 'Developer contributions play a vital part in delivering the infrastructure and affordable housing that communities need.
'Councils work hard to secure these contributions, but the current system is not delivering the full benefits it should.
'It's right that the National Audit Office recognises the challenges councils face, and the need for further capacity and capability support for council planning departments.'
The NAO also criticised record keeping on how much developers were paying to councils.
While councils who receive Section 106 or CIL money must provide a statement each year to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, which oversees councils, it said some didn't provide them on time and others didn't have enough detail.
MHCLG's latest estimate suggested that the value of agreed developer contributions was £5.5billion in 2022-23, down from £6.4billion in 2019-20.
In 2024, the Home Builders Federation estimated that local authorities in England and Wales held over £8billion in unspent developer contributions.
This is partly because building projects often take a long time to complete.
Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: 'To ensure the developer contributions system delivers value for money, important issues must be addressed, including reducing the imbalance in skills and experience between local planning authorities and large developers; the complexity of financial viability assessments; and the lack of coordinated central Government support.'
This is Money contacted MHCLG for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
43 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour at war over spending plans as Number 10 tries to stem threat from Farage
Sir Keir Starmer is fighting to quell mounting Labour tensions over how to deal with the threat from Nigel Farage, as bitter Whitehall negotiations over the Government's Spending Review go down to the wire. Sources describe 'very unpleasant' exchanges between Rachel Reeves and senior Cabinet ministers, including Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and Local Government Secretary Angela Rayner, as the Chancellor prepares to give the NHS a £30billion boost at the expense of the police and local councils. Preparations for Wednesday's announcement have been held against the backdrop of slamming doors and raised voices, as No 10 and the Treasury work out how to divide a limited pot of public money in a way most likely to arrest the surge in support for Mr Farage's Reform UK. Ms Reeves is expected to set out plans for an extra £113billion in spending on infrastructure projects such as Sizewell C nuclear power plant, and an extra 2.8 per cent real-terms increase in the NHS's £200billion-a-year budget, amounting to an extra £30billion by 2028. But with the economy barely growing, other departments have had to take a hit as a result. A source said: 'It turned nasty between Yvette and Rachel. It was just as bad as that between Rachel and Angela, who walked out during her negotiations. 'Yvette was just passing on the concerns of the police, who said that without more money they would be forced to make stark choices about which crimes they prioritise. 'The anger of the police shows they've been briefed by Cooper on how the negotiations are going, and they're not happy.' Reeves plotting £3bn tax raid on pension By CALUM MUIRHEAD Rachel Reeves is planning a £3billion tax raid on millions of pensions. The new Pension Schemes Bill lays out a blueprint for companies to take out 'surplus' cash from certain schemes. The theory behind the plan is that companies can use the money to invest in their business and that would fuel growth. But experts fear this could lead to a repeat of the Robert Maxwell scandal of the early 1990s, when the late tycoon stole £400 million from his staff pension fund to prop up his companies. The Chancellor, who is desperate to raise tax revenues, would benefit because any 'surpluses' released are taxed at 25 per cent, which could raise almost £3billion over a decade. The bill, tabled in Parliament last week, will affect old-style pension schemes where retirement incomes are linked to people's pay packets, which have around nine million members. A minister said: 'The negotiations over the final settlements are still not sorted for some departments. They're going to carry on fighting it out over the weekend.' Another source added: 'Rachel will stand up and promise things she can't deliver. There will be a lot of guff about how she will deliver security for the country. 'But how can you promise to deliver security when Trump's doing what he's doing on tariffs and Putin is so active?' At the heart of the schism is an ideological divide between the party's Blairites, represented in No 10 by Liz Lloyd, Sir Keir's head of policy delivery, and Morgan McSweeney, the Downing Street chief of staff. Mr McSweeney is desperate to tackle small boats migration while Ms Lloyd is encouraging spending more on the NHS. Rachel Reeves is planning a £3billion tax raid on millions of pensions. The new Pension Schemes Bill lays out a blueprint for companies to take out 'surplus' cash from certain schemes. The theory behind the plan is that companies can use the money to invest in their business and that would fuel growth. But experts fear this could lead to a repeat of the Robert Maxwell scandal of the early 1990s, when the late tycoon stole £400 million from his staff pension fund to prop up his companies. The Chancellor, who is desperate to raise tax revenues, would benefit because any 'surpluses' released are taxed at 25 per cent, which could raise almost £3billion over a decade. The bill, tabled in Parliament last week, will affect old-style pension schemes where retirement incomes are linked to people's pay packets, which have around nine million members.
Daily Mail
43 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Whitehall staff are flouting the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex 'by telling transgender women it's okay to use the female toilets'
Civil servants are flouting the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex, with some declaring it is 'completely the choice' of a man who is transitioning to choose which bathroom they use. A message sent to officials by the LGBT + network in the Department of Transport after the landmark court judgment said staff can decide themselves if they can use 'any appropriate single sex toilets and other facilities'. 'It is assumed that the individual knows which facilities are the best match for their gender identity and expression,' it added. The message, obtained using Freedom of Information requests, was sent to staff on April 22, the week after the Supreme Court ruling that men who change gender are not legally women. It says 'HR have assured us that all current guidance and policies still stand' and gives the example that a recently transitioned man may need to 'build confidence in his new gender expression' and that the bathroom they choose is 'completely his choice'. Members of LGBT+ networks in other government departments also sent messages expressing disappointment with the court ruling, including staff in the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology being told: 'While the judgment itself is outside of our hands, we want to say clearly that we're disappointed by the decision.' A message sent to officials by the LGBT + network in the Department of Transport after the landmark court judgment said staff can decide themselves if they can use 'any appropriate single sex toilets and other facilities' Elliot Keck, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, which compiled the research, said: 'The correspondence demonstrates how out of control staff networks are.' A Government spokesman said: 'Staff networks do not set policy in this space. We will update policy wherever it is necessary.' It comes as another report, by think-tank the Policy Exchange, has found that dozens of organisations question the Supreme Court's ruling on the definition of a woman. Independent MP Rosie Duffield said: 'Government ministers must lead from the top to ensure public bodies comply with the law.'
Daily Mail
43 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Is Angela 'Two Homes' Rayner paying the council tax surcharge on her grace-and-favour second residence?
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner was last night facing questions over whether she is paying her own council tax surcharge on her second home. 'Two Homes' Rayner moved into her four-bedroom, grace-and-favour residence in Admiralty House in December – four months before her Local Government Department started levying an extra 100 per cent council tax charge on second homes. Official records of MPs' expenses show that when she entered the Government, Ms Rayner designated her Ashton-under-Lyne constituency home as her 'primary residence', and her pre-Admiralty home – a rented London flat – as her second home. That allowed her to claim back the £1,621 council tax bill on the London flat from the taxpayer as one of the housing costs reimbursed by Commons authorities. But if she is still designating Ashton as her primary residence now, the £2,034 council tax bill for Admiralty House doubles to a whopping £4,068 if classed as a second home. And, as a minister living in an official residence, she would have to pay both that and the £3,338 bill for the Ashton house herself – a total of £7,406. Ashton does not attract a second-home premium because she has family members living there permanently, but questions have been raised as to whether or not she is paying the full £7,406. Tory Shadow Minister Richard Holden asked the PM and the Chancellor if they were paying council tax on their Downing St flats as primary residences, and was informed that they were. If she is still designating Ashton as her primary residence now, the £2,034 council tax bill for Admiralty House (pictured) doubles to a whopping £4,068 if classed as a second home But on asking the same of Ms Rayner, he was stonewalled with: 'The Deputy Prime Minister's council tax responsibility is properly discharged.' In a letter to Ms Rayner, Kevin Hollinrake, Shadow Secretary for Housing and Communities, asked if she had evaded the surcharge by 'flipping' her primary residence designation. He said: 'If the minister in charge of council tax has dodged the super-tax by 'flipping', this raises serious concerns about the ethics and integrity of Labour ministers.' She became known as 'Two Homes' Rayner after this newspaper revealed she shuttled between two council properties early in her marriage. When her office was asked if she was paying a bill of £4,068 in London and £3,338 in her constituency, a source said: 'The administration of council tax for Admiralty House is for the Cabinet Office and Westminster Council, as has been the case for successive Secretaries of State.'
