Housing and planning at the Labour, LibDem and Reform party conferences

September was the start of party conference season, and housing and planning featured very differently across the three conferences. Labour used its conference to announce several new measures, while Reform UK set out a clear alternative focused on brownfield development. For the Liberal Democrats, housing was noticeably less prominent. Here is a brief review of what came out of the Labour, Reform and Liberal Democrat conferences, ahead of the Conservatives meeting from 4 to 7 October.

Labour

Labour used its conference to move attention away from its housebuilding record and towards a series of new government initiatives. While the government has made some positive changes to the planning system, it is now badly behind its target. Delivering 438,000 homes since entering government, leaving it approximately 220,000 behind where it would need to be at this point.

It can be argued that this not all of Labour’s fault. The Iran war has increased inflation, energy prices and the cost of construction, while high interest rates and weak demand have made developers more cautious. However, the government does not appear to be proposing anything radical to get housebuilding moving at the level required.

Instead, Andy Burnham and chancellor John Healey used the conference to offer more government support and intervention. The new ‘Your First Home’ scheme will help first-time buyers purchase new-build homes with smaller deposits, while councils will receive more support to build homes, use public land and take control of empty or poor-quality properties. These announcements took much of the attention away from the fact that housing delivery and planning permissions continue to fall.

There is also some unhappiness within the Labour Party about the direction of planning reform. Speaking at a conference fringe event, Labour MP Chris Hinchliff argued that the government should “rip up the NPPF and start again”, claiming the current system leaves councils reacting to speculative applications rather than planning positively for the homes communities need.

He did, however, welcome Labour’s vision-led approach to transport planning and its proposed new towns. He also warned that Labour would be “stuffed” if it had not visibly improved the housing crisis by the next general election.

The conference therefore produced plenty of housing announcements, but there is still a major question over whether any of them will deliver homes quickly enough to turn around Labour’s current housebuilding record.

Reform

Reform set out a very different approach, focused on moving development away from rural and suburban greenfield sites and towards towns and cities.

The party would scrap mandatory housing targets and allow councils to decide how much development should take place locally. To encourage brownfield development, Reform would remove affordable housing requirements, developer contributions and some environmental regulations from qualifying sites. New brownfield homes would also be exempt from stamp duty, capital gains tax and income tax on rents for 10 years.

Richard Tice described this as a “deliberate re-prioritisation”, arguing that national housing targets place too much pressure on market towns and villages. Reform estimates its brownfield incentives could deliver an additional 20,000 homes a year.

This will probably appeal to Reform voters, particularly in the rural and suburban areas where the party performs strongly. However, removing housing targets could significantly reduce greenfield development, with no guarantee that brownfield sites would deliver enough homes to make up the difference.

Housing and planning were not a major priority at the Liberal Democrat conference, with no significant new policy announcements.

The party repeated its commitment to building 380,000 homes a year, including 150,000 social homes. Ed Davey said clearly that the country needs more homes, while Gideon Amos MP, a former town planner, was probably the party’s strongest voice on social and affordable housing.

However, the party avoided the more difficult question of where those homes should go. This perhaps reflects the party’s long-running tensions between pro-development members and councillors and activists elected on campaigns opposing development locally.

The Conservative Party conference takes place this week, when we should get a clearer idea of its housing and planning offer.