Agenda item

To consider the Motion from Cllrs Nick Botterill and Philip Whitehead.

 

On the invitation of the Chairman, Cllr Nick Botterill proposed the motion as set out in the agenda, which was seconded by Cllr Philip Whitehead.

 

Cllr Botterill identified what he saw as the deep flaws in the use of the housing land supply metric in the planning system. He highlighted that Wiltshire Council had granted permission for around 18,000 unbuilt homes, enough to demonstrate at least a nine-year housing land supply based on current requirements. However, as only 47 percent of the homes granted permission were expected to be completed by March 2028, the council was only able to demonstrate a 3.85-year housing land supply based on government measurements. He reminded Council that as Wiltshire was not able to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, the tilted balance in the planning system restricted their ability to prevent speculative development on green field sites.

 

It was argued that deficiency in the housing land supply was due to the actions of developers rather than Wiltshire Council. He argued that the system created an incentive for developers not to build on allocated sites, as it gave them a better chance of gaining permission to build on more lucrative but unallocated sites. As a result many large local authorities were unable to demonstrate the requisite housing land supply. Cllr Botterill encouraged Council to support the motion to urge the new government to rethink the current system.

 

Cllr Richard Clewer, Leader of the Council, stated that the issues raised went to the heart of what was wrong with the planning system, as the way that the five-year land supply was measured allowed developers to game the system. He informed Council that the latest figures were that Wiltshire had approved planning permission for 18,837 unbuilt homes and there were around one and a half million nationwide. He emphasised that Wiltshire needed to build homes in accordance with the Local Plan but risked having decisions imposed at appeal that were only in the interests of developers.

 

He reported that he had lobbied the previous government heavily about this issue and that that they had started to take his feedback onboard. He had also met with the new minister in his capacity as housing spokesperson for the County Council Network to press for a system that compelled developers to build. He emphasised that no developer would be willing to build houses at a rate which saw average house prices fall.

 

The Chairman moved that Council debate the motion, which was seconded by the Vice-Chairman and agreed by Council.

 

Other Group Leaders were then invited to comment on the motion.

 

Cllr Ian Thorn, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, spoke in support of the motion. He stated that different governments had been happy to allow the development industry to provide virtually all the country’s social housing and huge swathes of its social infrastructure, rather than enforcing plan led development. He felt that the system had been working against communities for decades. He also noted that he had recently read that Dorset was able to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.

 

Cllr Thorn then proposed an amendment to add the following words to the end of the motion, seconded by Cllr Gordon King, as he argued that developer inaction was a key factor:

 

Council also calls on the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State to introduce legislation to compel developers to build consented plots within a set timescale.

 

The meeting then adjourned at approximately 4:20pm and returned at approximately 4:35pm.

 

When the meeting resumed, Cllr Botterill confirmed that he would not accept the amendment as a friendly amendment.

 

The Chairman then invited Group Leaders to comment on the proposed amendment.

 

Cllr Clewer, Leader of the Council, explained that he was unable to support the amendment as the legislation relating to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) already existed and Wiltshire Council had already made representations about it. He also stressed that if all 18,837 unbuilt homes approved in Wiltshire were completed within a set timescale that it could far exceed the demand for housing. Although the welcomed the intention of the amendment, he felt it was a blunt instrument that would have unintended consequences.

 

Cllr Jonathan Seed interjected to propose that the meeting move to the vote, noting the proposer of the amendment, Cllr Thorn, was not present to speak to his amendment. Cllr Richard Britton seconded Cllr Seed’s proposal.

 

Cllr Paul Sample JP sought to raise a point of order that Cllr Thorn had been held up in a queue.

 

The Chairman called for a vote on whether to put the amendment proposed by Cllr Thorn to a vote without further debate. After the vote, she declared that there were a majority against, and that debate would proceed.

 

Cllr Seed then raised a point of order seeking a recorded vote to confirm a majority had been against his proposal. The Chairman confirmed she was of the view there had been a majority and debate would therefore proceed.

 

Upon his return Cllr Thorn was invited to speak on his amendment in his capacity as Group Leader of the Liberal Democrats. Cllr Thorn described his amendment as common sense and said it got to the heart of the issue.

 

Cllr Jon Hubbard, deputising for the Independent Group, spoke in support of the amendment as he felt that it reinforced the original motion.

 

Cllr Ricky Rogers, Leader of the Labour Group, stated that he supported the amendment as well as the sentiment of the original motion.

 

After the Group Leaders had spoken, the Chairman then opened the general debate on whether to add the amendment to the motion.

 

Statements in objection to the amendment included that the only realistic mechanism to compel developers to build was to withdraw permissions and that this would exacerbate issues with the five-year land supply. It was felt that the only solution was to reform the way in which the five-year housing land supply was measured so that Wiltshire Council were held accountable for the number of permissions granted and developers were accountable for the completion rate.

 

Statements in support of the amendment noted that central government were the only body that could compel developers to build and that it would strengthen the original motion.

 

At the conclusion of the debate on the amendment, Cllr Thorn was given the opportunity to speak as its proposer. He noted concerns raised about the potential withdrawal of permissions. However, he highlighted that the request to compel developers to build was not made in isolation but was part of a representation asking the Secretary of State to review the wider five-year land supply mechanism. He also noted that withdrawing planning permission on site would have a significant impact on the balance sheet of housebuilding companies.

 

Cllr Botterill, the proposer of the original motion, then responded, emphasising that compelling all permissions to be built in five years would create a significant oversupply. He believed building that number of houses was undeliverable in that timeframe and compelling developers in that way would not withstand legal challenge.

 

There was then a vote of whether to add the amendment to the motion.

 

Votes for the amendment (25)

Votes against the amendment (35)

Votes in abstention (0)

 

Details of the recorded vote are attached to these minutes.

 

The Chairman gave the opportunity to the Group Leaders that had not already spoken on the original motion to do so.

 

The Chairman then opened original motion to general debate.

 

One member stated that he did not see the need for the debate as the new government’s consultation on changes to the NPPF had closed on 24 September. He stated that the position of the new government was, in his view, that all planning authorities should be compelled to maintain a five-year housing land supply. He did not believe that there was any chance of the government changing their position. Another member stated that it was Wiltshire Council’s responsibility to stand up against development that was not in accordance with the democratically approved Local Plan.

 

Other issues discussed included how Wiltshire Council was going to make progress towards demonstrating a four-year housing land supply before the government passed its legislation on the NPPF.

 

Cllr Botterill, as the mover of the motion, was given the opportunity to make closing remarks. He stated that emerging local plans at latter stages of scrutiny, such as Wiltshire’s, would continue to be examined under the version of the NPPF they were submitted under. He also confirmed that it had been announced that local authorities would be required to demonstrate a five, rather than four-year housing land supply. Whilst he wanted Wiltshire to demonstrate a five-year supply he did not feel this was not possible without cooperation from developers.

 

It was then,

 

Resolved:

 

This Council calls on the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, the Shadow Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the MPs representing Wiltshire to make them aware of the manifest flaws in the Housing Land Supply measure as currently applied and as proposed as part of the government’s planning reform consultation.

 

In accordance with the Constitution there was a recorded vote.

 

Votes for the motion (59)

Votes against the motion (1)

Votes in abstention (1)

 

Details of the recorded vote are attached to these minutes.