Further written evidence to be reported to the House
Housing and Regeneration Bill
12:00 pm
Neil Sinden: Thank you for the invitation to give evidence, which we welcome. I shall kick off with a few brief words about the four main areas of concern that the Campaign to Protect Rural England has about the Bill, and the areas on which we would like the Committee to focus its attention.
CPRE recognises that we need to supply more homes to house a growing number of households. We believe that the new agency and the provisions in the Bill should help considerably in achieving that objective. However, it is also important for the Committee to note that the delivery of new housing and associated development has a significant environmental effect with regard to land take and associated activity, so it is vital that the new homes are provided in ways that meet housing needs and minimise unnecessary harm to the environment, and that the planning system is used effectively as a means of achieving that objective and engaging local communities in critical decisions.
There are four areas that we would like to focus on during this session. The first area relates to the scope of the powers available to the new Homes and Communities Agency and the possibility of conflicts of interest arising in relation to the scope of its powers. The second area relates to the agency’s role in promoting housing-led brownfield regeneration and the extent to which the Bill provides an adequate framework for the agency to focus on that objective. The third area relates to the extent to which the agency should be subject to a duty to deliver sustainable development and wider public benefit in its activities, including powers to dispose of land, assets and buildings. The fourth area relates to our interest in exploring the extent to which the Bill could give a greater focus to the specific needs for affordable housing in rural areas.
There are three aspects of that agenda that we would like to talk about: first, the scope and potential of community land trusts in rural contexts and the extent to which the Bill could address that issue; secondly, the possibility of making the agency subject to a target for the delivery of affordable homes in rural communities, picking up on the Affordable Rural Housing Commission’s recommendations; and thirdly, we wonder whether it is possible to look at how a rural exemption might be developed in relation to the leasehold enfranchisement legislation, which we and other rural bodies fear might encourage a leakage of affordable housing in the shared ownership sector in rural areas.