<b></b><p></p><p><b><b>John Stewart fears the government&amp;’s proposed planning reforms will not lead to any increase in housing provision</b></b><br><b>From a housing perspective, there are three key elements to the government&amp;’s Green Paper proposals for planning reform in England: development control, strategic planning and planning obligations.</b><br><b><b>Development control</b></b><br> Development control is grossly inefficient and needs practical, workable improvements. Some of the Green Paper&amp;’s recommendations, if implemented, should benefit housebuilders. Unfortunately, the misconceived proposals for planning obligations (discussed below) are likely to undermine these benefits because section 106 negotiations are the most important source of planning delay.</p><p>The system&amp;’s inefficiency can be seen in the graph below. Since 1992, the eight-week share of residential planning decisions has more than halved to an abysmal 16%, while the 13-week share is down from 63% in 1993 to 34%. There has been a clear deterioration since 1997 when new guidance on negotiating planning obligations was introduced (Circular 1/97).</p><p><b><b>Strategic planning</b></b><br> The plan-led system, introduced by the Conservative government in 1991, has been a failure, a conclusion the government clearly accepts. But its failure has been more one of implementation than of structure.</p><p>To understand the current system&amp;’s failings, we need to distinguish causes, symptoms and consequences. Only if the underlying causes …