The government has unveiled a major overhaul of England's planning system, a move immediately condemned by the Conservatives as a return to the controversial practice of 'garden grabbing'. Ministers argue the reforms are essential to rescue Labour's target of building 1.5 million new homes and unblock a system that stifles growth.
What the New Planning Framework Proposes
In a significant policy reversal, the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) will encourage the redevelopment of low-density residential plots. This includes introducing higher buildings on street corners and 'infill' development within existing residential boundaries. The aim, according to Chancellor Rachel Reeves, is to end a system that 'slows growth, frustrates business and prices the next generation out of a secure home'.
These changes effectively tear up rules established in 2010 specifically designed to prevent developers from buying homes with large gardens, demolishing them, and building multiple new properties in their place. Critics argue this will transform the character of neighbourhoods and lead to a loss of urban green space.
Further measures include curbing the power of local councillors to block smaller developments and preventing so-called Nimby protesters from lodging repeated objections. Decisions on minor applications will be handed to 'expert trained planners' instead of council committees.
A 'Free for All' or Essential Building Boost?
The proposals have ignited a fierce political row. Tory planning spokesman Gareth Bacon accused the government of returning to the 'garden grabbing' policies of the past Labour administration. He stated, 'It is clear that, because of Labour's failure to build homes on brownfield land, it now has residential gardens in its sights.'
Former deputy prime minister Sir Oliver Dowden warned the plans would create a 'free for all' leading to the destruction of 'pristine countryside' in areas like his Hertfordshire constituency. The reforms also include a 'default yes' to applications within a 15-minute walk of the busiest railway stations, provided they deliver at least 20 homes per acre.
Planning minister Matthew Pennycook defended the approach, insisting the government still prioritises brownfield land but acknowledged it is not enough alone. 'There is no way of building the volume of homes our country needs with brownfield land alone,' he said, adding that some green belt land would need to be released in a 'fair way'.
Broader Impacts and Political Fallout
The controversy extends beyond gardens. The new framework waters down biodiversity rules for development sites under half an acre, a move the RSPB labelled a 'blow for nature'. While new homes will be required to install 'swift bricks' for birds, environmental protections are being relaxed to accelerate building.
The political stakes are high. Housing starts plummeted to 139,000 in Labour's first year, down from 207,000 and the lowest level since the pandemic. Housing Secretary Steve Reed, who has adopted the slogan 'Build Baby Build', admitted the current system says 'no' more than 'yes'.
Shadow housing secretary Sir James Cleverly seized on the figures, saying: 'Labour talk a big game on housebuilding but have completely failed to deliver... This risks bulldozing through communities, overriding local democracy and concreting over the countryside.' The Local Government Association warned that removing planning committees undermines local democracy, calling them the 'democratic backbone of the planning system'.
As the debate intensifies, the government faces the dual challenge of kickstarting its faltering housebuilding programme while convincing communities it will not sacrifice their local environment and democratic voice in the process.
