Introduction

Development in the countryside, and the way the planning system regulates that development, is a hugely contentious issue. This chapter focuses on housing – and related infrastructure – on ‘green fields’, both at the rural–urban fringe and beyond. It begins by setting out the narrative of planning's ‘big debate’ regarding housing development, tracing its evolution in the UK through New Labour's time in power since their first general election victory in 1997. But it is impossible to focus on housing in the countryside without positioning this issue within a broader examination of house-building, the government's call for ‘sustainable communities’, the reform of the planning system and the changing structures of local and regional planning, which are being called upon to manage growth in new ways, aligning themselves with a ‘market perspective’ on house-building.

This chapter is divided into three parts: the first examines the story so far, looking at the changing shape of housing/planning debate since the mid-1990s; this narrative phase ends in 2002/03 when Labour first set out its ‘Communities Plan’. The second part picks up where the first left off, focusing on planning reform in the run-up to the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act and the Barker Review of Housing Supply (HM Treasury, 2004) and ending with the recent revision of policy guidance dealing with planning for housing (DCLG, 2006). The third section focuses on a particular region – the South East of England – examining the housing growth debate generally and focusing on that component of growth that cannot be accommodated within ‘existing’ urban areas. Throughout the discussion presented in this chapter, questions of affordability are raised and related to the aspiration of creating a more market-responsive planning system. New connections have been made in the last couple of years between the cost of homes, the efficient operation of housing markets, and the planning system's role in responding to market signals. Most recently, the Treasury (through its ‘Barker Review’) has focused attention on planning, house-building and the economy, challenging the idea that affordability is a desirable add-on resulting from ad hoc planning intervention (including local plan policies that support the negotiation of a community ‘gain’ from planning permissions: the “muddling through” approach to procuring affordable homes, according to Hoggart and Henderson, 2005, p 194).