Business groups have urged the government to press ahead with their proposed changes to the planning system in a bid to lift investment and boost growth.
The government has put forward a major set of reforms to the planning system, which is widely seen as one of the major barriers to economic growth.
The changes include the re-introduction of housing targets, a partial review of the green belt and plans to streamline the process for major pieces of infrastructure.
The consultation period for the changes ended yesterday and business groups were widely supportive of the changes, arguing that they were essential for helping to fuel stronger economic growth.
Jonny Haseldine, policy manager at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), said the government should “move quickly” to implement its plans.
“Getting a planning system that works for business is crucial to driving investment and economic growth,” he said.
The BCC said that plans for more houses were welcome and would help employers access skilled staff in local communities.
However, it also called for clarity on how authorities will be required to assess the need for employment land so that businesses can invest.
“The new framework has the potential to unlock the planning system for businesses and boost economic growth, but time is of the essence,” he said.
John Foster, chief policy and campaigns officer at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said the focus on planning reform was a “real statement of intent”.
“Unlocking private investment is the catalyst for the productivity gains needed to deliver long-term sustainable growth. But right now, delays in the planning system are putting a handbrake on investment and growth,” he said.
Foster said the government should focus on “consistency, simplicity and resourcing” in order to support business investment.
In particular, the CBI called for planning authorities to bring in ring-fenced fees to ensure revenue generated through planning applications could support efficiency.
This echoed comments from the BCC, whose members said they were prepared to pay a “reasonable increase” in fees if it led to better service.
The government estimates that there is a £262m shortfall in funding for local authority development management services because planning fees do not raise enough.
It wants to ensure that application fees cover the authorities’ costs in determining the application.
Many of the changes were also welcomed by experts in the field, who have long been calling for changes.
“Repeatedly, research shows the planning system’s detrimental impact on housebuilding has created some of the biggest shortages of housing in big UK cities, with knock-on impacts on growth,” Paul Swinney, director of policy and research at Centre for Cities, said.
However, Swinney said that the government could go further in some areas, such as reviewing the green belt to identify land for development of transport links.
He also warned that achieving the government’s objectives would likely require more fundamental reform of local government.
Matthew White, UK real estate managing partner at Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF), thought planning success would hinge on local “political bravery” rather than national policy reform.
“The question, therefore, is whether local government and local communities are ready for radical pro-development action, or whether the fear of change will result in further retrenchment and the continuation of planning by appeal in many areas,” he said.