Housing secretary Robert Jenrick has said upcoming radical planning reform is likely to include changes to the system of developer contributions, alongside a separate review of planning minister processes, following controversy over Westferry Printworks.
Jenrick has come under fire after rushing through the approval for Richard Desmond’s £1bn Docklands development to avoid a £45m CIL charge.
In May, he reversed his approval for the scheme, admitting “apparent bias” in the timing of his decision.
After releasing documents revealing his communications with Desmond and his company Northern & Shell, Jenrick was called to give public evidence to the housing, communities and local government select committee today (22 July).
The housing secretary stood by his decision to approve 1,524 homes and added that he would like to see a fairer developer contribution regime. Jenrick said the system for CIL and section 106 was “imperfect” and should be included in consultation for the upcoming reform.
He said: “We are about to bring forward proposals for wider planning reform which we intend to consult upon and I would imagine that the developer contribution system will be part of that conversation.
“I am convinced that there is a better system and what I would like to see is a system which is more certain for all parties, both the applicant and the council, and one which does deliver a fair contribution towards the social infrastructure of local communities.”
Jenrick invited the committee to share their views in the consultation, which is expected to launch this month.
He also reiterated his offer for the committee to share their comments guidance for planning ministers, in a review of processes following the mistakes on Westferry Printworks.
Jenrick said officials in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government had been aware of his attendance at a dinner in November, where he had sat next to Desmond and others involved in the development. He added that he had also had text messages from him.
He said: “Both of those things were made aware to the department, at no point did the department then say that I should behave differently going forward or that I should have behaved differently in the past and I was never asked to recuse myself.
“Clearly the review that we are going to do into how we conduct these planning decisions in the future will need to consider whether we need to strengthen the advice that is available to all parties, so that we never have difficulties like this in the future.”
To send feedback, e-mail emma.rosser@egi.co.uk or tweet @EmmaARosser or @estatesgazette
