Streamlined planning decisions in England envisaged under finalised law

The wide-ranging bill promotes a raft of planning reforms. Some are relevant to the specific consenting regime that applies to ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’ (NSIPs) under the Planning Act 2008, but others – like the ones addressed below – will impact on planning applications subject to approval under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

The package of reforms reflects manifesto commitments Labour made before coming to power in 2024. A streamlining of the planning system is at the heart of its ‘Plan for Change’ to boost economic growth, including by facilitating the speedier delivery of major infrastructure and scaling up housing delivery. In relation to the latter, the government has pledged to deliver 1.5 million new homes over the course of the current parliament, which ends in 2029. Housing secretary Steve Reed is expected to set out the government's updated planning strategy before Christmas.

Changes impacting the planning process

A significant change the bill does provide for is the potential for planning applications to be decided by planning officers as opposed to elected planning committees, by increasing delegated decision-making. The idea is to speed up decision-making on routine and policy-compliant applications. Regulations will need to be made to enable this change and will specify which planning applications are to be determined by officers. Those regulations will be subject to public consultation.

Included in the bill is a new power to regulate the size and composition of planning committees. The government has already held a consultation on this, its response to which is still to be published. This is anticipated along with draft regulations in early 2026. The bill also introduces a new requirement for all planning committee members to be subject to mandatory training and being certified as having completed that training. The training requirements will be specified in further regulations.

The new national scheme of delegation would be supported by best practice guidance.

Nationally prescribed planning fees are set to change with local planning authorities (LPAs) being able to set their own fees locally. Before the bill was introduced into parliament, the government consulted on planning fees and the responses have informed the provisions in the bill and safeguards to be put in place. A feature of those provisions is a cap on fees to ensure LPAs charge no more than what they require to cover their costs. The bill requires fee income to be reinvested in the planning service – and the Secretary of State will have new powers to intervene if an authority sets fees that are excessive or unjustified. Further consultation is expected, and new guidance will confirm the details of these reforms.

The role of Natural England, the government's adviser for the natural environment and a statutory consultee under planning legislation, will also be enhanced. It will have more discretion on when and how it has to respond to LPAs on planning applications which affect protected sites or species. The aim of this change is to allow Natural England to focus on those proposals with significant or complex environmental impacts rather than having to respond to every question raised by an LPA. Natural England will be able to decline requests from LPAs on “specified” planning matters – a concept that will be defined in new regulations, but which is likely to cover more straightforward projects where standard advice exists and environmental risk is low. LPAs are to be given more guidance to help them with the more straightforward projects.

Housing and development law expert Iain Gilbey of Pinsent Masons broadly welcomed the package of changes.

“None of the provisions are silver bullets that, individually or collectively, will unlock all of the delays that we experience in the decision-making process, but they herald iterative improvements and a welcome degree of streamlining.”

“The threshold at which delegated decision making by officers is set will be absolutely critical. If the government’s housing delivery aspirations are to be reached, then delegated decision-making will need to include substantial policy-compliant schemes, in order to make a meaningful difference to the speed and certainty of planning decision-making. Only in that way will market and investor confidence in the planning system be improved,” he added.

Tackling the effects of project delay caused by legal proceedings

The bill also addresses a problem some developers have faced relating to the timing out of planning permissions where their projects are impacted by legal proceedings. Under the bill, the period developers will have for commencing works where the planning permission or listed building consent they have been granted has been the subject of a judicial review or statutory challenge which reaches hearing stage, will be extended.

Existing legislation already provides for the one-year extension of the default three-year period where a judicial review or statutory challenge is commenced, but the bill goes further to provide for specific extensions of a year if a High Court challenge is allowed to proceed; and an additional year if permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal is granted, and two additional years if the Supreme Court grants permission to appeal. These periods are cumulative. The provisions also extend to outline permissions and reserved matters. The provisions will not have retrospective effect.

Planning law expert Michael Pocock of Pinsent Masons said: “Developers have too often been forced to make difficult decisions as to whether to spend significant sums of money to implement planning permissions whilst the planning permission is subject to ongoing legal proceedings. Even if they are confident in the defence of the judicial review it is rare that a developer will wish to do so against this backdrop, or their funders will not let them. Even where a claim is dismissed by the High Court, and the planning permission is left intact, an application to the Court of Appeal can be made fairly easily and will often push the legal process beyond the one-year extension period permitted under the previous legislative position.”

“Whilst this change in itself will not dissuade objectors from bringing a judicial review application in the first place it is nevertheless a subtle but important change which will provide some comfort to developers concerned about implementation of their scheme being timed out whilst at the same time fighting proceedings,” he added.

The government said that the change would mean “the planning system remains fair and proportionate, supporting investment and development while respecting the judicial process”. The groundwork for this change was laid by Lord Banner KC, who identified the issue as a result of his broader work on delays in the planning system and who had tabled an amendment to ‘stop the clock’ on the implementation period while a judicial review was ongoing and until the challenge was concluded. Prior to his amendment, this was not an issue that was covered by the bill. The government, however, accepted the matter should be considered and tabled its own amendments which were then approved.

Pocock said other reforms will reduce the potential for project delays to arise from judicial review proceedings: “Changes in relation to nationally significant infrastructure projects, by removing the right to appeal against a decision not to give permission for a judicial review to be brought, where the High Court deems such a case to be ‘totally without merit’ at the oral hearing, will also bring more balance and fairness to the judicial review system by removing unmeritorious claims at the permission stage.”

“Taken together these are incremental rather than seismic changes but will nevertheless give developers some confidence that the avenues for some claimants using the judicial review system as a tactic to delay or thwart development are being narrowed down,” he said.

The environment and nature

The bill provides for the introduction of environmental delivery plans (EDPs) and a Nature Restoration Fund. The changes mean that rather than carry out site-specific mitigation works themselves, developers would have the option to meet site-specific environmental obligations by utilising an EDP, where one is in place, and would pay the required nature restoration levy amount to discharge their obligations.

The aim is to deliver “a strategic approach to the discharge of environmental obligations” rather than on a piecemeal, project-by-project basis to ensure an “overall improvement” to nature. The Government believes this will result in better environmental outcomes and reduce system delays so that development, in particular housing delivery, can happen more quickly.

Environmental law expert Fiona Ross of Pinsent Masons said: “EDPs will be brought forward by Natural England, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Secretary of State. They will set out a package of conservation measures that are sufficient to address one or more environmental impacts of development and secure an environmental uplift or net gain. It is expected that initial focus will be on the development of EDPs to address nutrient neutrality, so as to enable the delivery of the government’s housing strategy.”

Among other things, the new regime is underpinned by a strengthened test for ensuring that an EDP does deliver an overall environmental improvement as well as obligations on Natural England to monitor the outcomes of the conservation measures in an EDP.

Ross said: “Whilst the proposals have the potential to significantly streamline the putting in place of mitigation by developers, EDPs will take some time to be established, with Natural England expected to work with farmers, habitat bank operators and nature conservation NGOs to design and deliver them. For impacts for which there is no EDP, developers will still have to secure their own bespoke mitigation.”

Compulsory purchase

The bill provides for further reforms to the compulsory purchase order (CPO) regime, building on those introduced by the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA).

There are updates to procedural requirements, such as to allow electronic service of statutory notices and to streamline the contents of notices published in the press; as well as other technical changes aimed at shortening the timescales involved in the CPO process, including an expedited procedure for implementing compulsory purchase powers via general vesting declarations (GVDs) and the ability to advance the vesting date by agreement.

The bill provides for changes to the proposed new regime in the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 for the temporary possession of land. Planning law expert Heidi Slater of Pinsent Masons said: “If brought into force, this regime would enable an acquiring authority to take possession of land temporarily in connection with a scheme, subject to the payment of rent or compensation and the requirement to restore/reinstate the land after its temporary use had ended. The bill prevents that proposed temporary possession regime from applying to infrastructure projects for which temporary possession powers are typically already available via other legislation, including NSIPs consented under the Planning Act 2008 and infrastructure consented under the Transport and Works Act 1992.”

The bill includes changes to the CPO compensation regime which will affect the way in which statutory loss payments are allocated, particularly between landlords and occupiers of land. Further changes to the CPO compensation regime, and the way in which the market value of land is assessed for compensation purposes, are relevant only to CPOs for housing, development or regeneration schemes where they include public sector-led affordable or social housing, health or education uses. Those changes mean that landowners will not be able to obtain a premium for their land based on the possibility of it having a more valuable future use – so-called ‘hope value’ – where there is an overriding public interest in setting compensation at a rate that does not reflect that value.

The range of projects where an acquiring authority can ask for hope value to be ignored has also been expanded, under the bill, to include CPO schemes made on behalf of parish/town and community councils by local authorities with the purpose of providing affordable or social housing. The government has stressed that safeguards will apply and that if land is acquired without hope value for one of the specified purposes and then not used for that purpose, the former landowner can claim the difference later.

With the aim of streamlining and accelerating the CPO process, the bill also includes provisions which expand the circumstances in which an acquiring authority may confirm its own CPO under powers delegated by the confirming authority, usually the Secretary of State, and where a confirmation decision may be delegated to an inspector.

A return to regional planning

The bill also changes the way that development is planned for across England through the introduction of new ‘spatial development strategies’ (SDSs). These will be prepared by strategic planning authorities, dealing with planning matters relevant across multiple areas, such as infrastructure and housing. A SDS will form part of the development plan which LPAs must determine planning applications in accordance with, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This reintroduces an ‘area’ or ‘regional’ tier of planning which was part of the planning system up until 2010.

More development corporations coming – including for new towns

An announcement on funding streams for the government-selected new towns is expected shortly, to enable those projects to move ahead. An important delivery mechanism for those new towns – as well as some other projects – will be development corporations. The bill makes it easier to establish development corporations, gives them wider powers to acquire, develop and dispose of land and infrastructure – like roads, utilities, schools, hospitals – and provides for transport functions to be able to be conferred on development corporations.

Development corporations will be under a duty to have regard to the achievement of sustainable development goals and to have regard to climate change.

More new planning policy on the way

National development management policies (NDMPs) are expected to be developed by the government. 

The LURA contains provisions that allow the Secretary of State to make NDMPs “in relation to the development or use of land in England, or any part of England”.

Planning minister Matthew Pennycook has confirmed that NDMPs, which underpin determinations on planning applications in England, will be brought forward alongside the revised NPPF on a non-statutory basis. NDMPs will be material considerations to be taken into account by local decision-makers, as is the current planning policy position.

Pennycook has said that, to avoid disruption and delay to the planning process, the government has concluded that bringing forward NDMPs on a non-statutory basis, combined with further updates to the NPPF, will achieve its goals. However, he also said the statutory route under the LURA 2023 remains an option in future.

More broadly, there is still some uncertainty over whether a second piece of primary planning legislation will be pursued by the government during this parliament. However, the government has confirmed that, in principle, some further reforms will be taken forward, particularly in the prime minister’s initial response to the recent report of the nuclear taskforce. Together with the new housing strategy and updated NPPF, a raft of other new planning policy is expected too.

An updated NPPF and housing strategy next

Since coming to power, the government has already updated the national planning policy framework (NPPF) – the document that, beyond the law itself, sets out government planning policy and how it should be applied by English LPAs, both when setting local plans for their area and when determining planning applications.

The most recent changes to the NPPF promoted a “brownfield-first” policy for development. The brownfield-first policy is expected to be strengthened within the context of the new round of updates to the NPPF – a consultation is expected to be opened on that before the Christmas parliamentary recess, with the government having promised that the updated NPPF will be in place by summer 2026.

The government has resisted pressure to make it a statutory requirement for planning policies in development plans, particularly those in strategic development plans, to prioritise brownfield land re-use, making it clear that this principle is already embedded in national policy and that the next raft of changes to the NPPF would strengthen this principle.

The government said that further reforms, initially rejected by the Lords in response to a late government amendment to the bill at report stage, will be pursued, to extend the powers of the Secretary of State to issue a holding direction, the effect of which will temporarily prevent a LPA from issuing a refusal of a planning application for the period during which it is open to the Secretary of State to ‘call-in’ the application for their own determination. The government will also enable ‘called-in’ applications to be dealt with entirely through written representations, as opposed to a full inquiry, where the “main parties” request that. In relation to housing specifically, the government has said it will also pursue legislative changes to require LPAs to notify the Secretary of State where they intend to refuse an application for 150 homes or more.

In London, further developments are expected to impact on housing projects. Proposals giving temporary relief from the Community Infrastructure Levy and changes to mayoral planning powers are expected to be firmed up, while outcomes from a separate Greater London Authority consultation could result in time-limited changes to cycle parking requirements and changes to housing design guidance, together with a new time-limited planning route for the delivery of affordable housing. Final guidance is expected in early 2026.