House building in this country ground to a near halt in 2023 because the previous Government failed to reform our planning system, despite knowing that it is too slow and cumbersome and deters development. Our Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 18 December last year. It delivers fundamental reform to the planning system, speeding up the delivery of new homes and critical infrastructure. Thanks to this Government, young people who have been denied the chance of their own home will now get the key to their own front door at last.
I am concerned about the villages in my most beautiful constituency of Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket; there, people tell me that they are increasingly concerned about the lack of affordable housing in rural communities. What steps is the Minister taking to increase the supply of affordable housing for local people in rural villages through reforms to the planning system, and how will those reforms support the rejuvenation and long-term sustainability of our villages?
Our planning changes will support affordable rural housing by giving rural authorities greater flexibility to require affordable housing on smaller sites. Our £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, which opens to bids next month, is available to rural authorities as well.
I am sure we all agree that we cannot have sustainable communities if we do not have sustainable high streets. Would the Secretary of State agree that a fourfold increase in business rates over this Parliament does not make high-street businesses sustainable?
Of course high streets are vital to local communities. That is why it was so sad to see high streets up and down the country fall into severe decline in the 14 years in which the Conservatives were in power, during which the right hon. Gentleman served in the Cabinet. Units closed down; their shutters were pulled down, and the graffiti and litter in front of buildings deterred people from going to the high street. This Government are committed to restoring our high streets and protecting the businesses that operate there.
So many words, yet no answer. I asked the Secretary of State specifically about a fourfold increase, like the one that the White Lion on Streatham High Road in his constituency faces. We are talking about a 400% increase, even after transitional relief, from £3,000 a year to £12,000 a year. Will he urge the Chancellor to scrap business rates for businesses like the White Lion on Streatham High Road, and other hospitality and leisure businesses on the high street?
I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman knows that the measures put in place during the pandemic were always intended to come to an end; his Government were going to do the same thing. The Chancellor is looking at the impact of revaluation. She is fully aware of the concerns raised by publicans in Streatham and across the country, and is reviewing the situation, and we expect an announcement in due course.
T3. Major planning applications in Durham, such as those for the Milburngate site and Stack in the city centre, have been stalled for years. This has not only left two white elephants in the city centre, but had a significant impact on jobs, the economy and key venues that have been left undeveloped. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that major developments in the City of Durham and across the country are not subject to long delays?
While I appreciate my hon. Friend’s concern, we have strengthened policies in the draft national planning policy framework, which is currently out for consultation, that will ensure that major residential schemes are built out in reasonable time. I am more than happy to have a conversation with her about how that may impact developments in her constituency.
T2. The Secretary of State will be aware that the so-called fair funding settlement will leave my council of Richmond upon Thames some £29 million worse off over the next three years. It will leave our most vulnerable residents, including children with complex needs and elderly people, facing cuts in critical services, even if the council raises council tax by 5%. Will he extend the transitional period?
I have heard what the hon. Member has said, and will take it as a contribution to the consultation that we are having. She mentions the needs of children; she will have heard me say to colleagues that we have to change the way that we work on this issue. I will happily work with her to ensure that we cut the costs and get better outcomes for our kids.
T5. Every two hours, someone in the UK is paralysed as a result of a spinal cord injury. After treatment, there is a 20% chance of being sent to a care home due to a lack of suitable available housing. I cannot imagine how a young person feels when they are coping with one of the most traumatic moments of their life, and are literally left lying by themselves. That is unacceptable. Will the Minister meet me and the all-party parliamentary group on spinal cord injury to discuss the serious lack of suitable housing?
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. We have made proposals in the draft NPPF, which is out for consultation, to set new, higher requirements for authorities to deliver more accessible housing. This includes proposals to make meeting accessibility standards mandatory for 40% of new builds, and to ensure that local plans provide for wheelchair-accessible homes. I am more than happy to have another conversation with my hon. Friend on this issue.
T6. In February’s Government consultation on local government reorganisation, will the Minister consult on all four—I think it is four—options put forward by Devon, and how will she weight the criteria, so that she can decide on a selected, amended or perhaps new proposal in June?
I thank the hon. Member for his input. We have set out the process that we will undertake. We will judge the proposals from Devon against the published criteria.
T8. Families in Worcester are trapped in damp and mouldy homes. Disabled tenants are stuck without facilities and access, and repairs are going unaddressed—all because Platform Housing refuses to get its act together. What can we do about failing social landlords such as Platform?