Our housebuilding aspirations must not come at the expense of community infrastructure
There can be no question that there is a nationwide need for many new homes. There is also a desperate requirement for truly affordable homes at social rent levels. As such, the government’s target of 1.5 million new homes over the life of the current Parliamentary term is appropriate. However, I believe there must also be an equal emphasis on infrastructure – building communities and creating places where people choose to put down roots.
As the MP for Dagenham and Rainham I am constantly reminded of what this means, and of what good planning can accomplish. The Becontree estate, comprising over 30,000 homes, was built in the inter-war years. Its planners at the London County Council understood that the task wasn’t just about building homes to relieve slum housing conditions in east London – it was about creating a community. They made sure it had all the ingredients for long-term success: parks with lidos, a variety of green spaces, GP surgeries, primary and secondary schools, and plenty of shopping parades. Good access to District Line London Underground stations was also integral to the development.
Over recent years we have heard a lot about so-called ‘NIMBYs’ campaigning against new housing schemes. One major – and perfectly justifiable – reason for residents to object to new developments is that their existing social and public transport infrastructure is already creaking at the seams. Residents will often express concerns about the availability of GP appointments, or capacity at local schools for their children. Where such pressures exist, local feeling about a proposed development is likely to depend on whether new homes are accompanied by the health centres, schools, and public transport connections needed for new and existing communities to thrive.
Currently, councils can make new developments conditional on the completion of related infrastructure projects through ‘Grampian conditions’. But local authority planning departments are painfully overstretched and do not have the resources to successfully rebut the standard challenge from developers that requirements on infrastructure and facility provisions would make a project unviable.
The answer could be a national Grampian-style condition on major housing schemes, imposed through the planning system, to restrict the building of new homes until the essential surrounding infrastructure is in development.
I have no doubt that developers and others will howl “It’s not fair”, and claim that such a change would reduce housing output. Indeed, I recall one conversation with a developer in which they stated, as a matter of fact, “Our job is to build houses; the infrastructure is your problem”. Yet the “homes at any cost” is a mantra which will do more to usher in the social problems of the future than anything else – and will continue to generate local opposition to schemes. The post-war Labour government understood this, and made good use of ‘special development orders’ to ensure that infrastructure was a key feature of the new town movement. We need to reimagine this approach.
I welcome the measures in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to deliver more nationally significant projects like data centres, reservoirs, and projects related to Great British Energy. However, nothing yet exists to ensure that social infrastructure, public services, and amenities are delivered as part of large-scale housing developments. This is an oversight. Given the ongoing housing crisis and the resulting drive to deliver homes at pace, we cannot rely solely on discretionary council powers to deliver the infrastructure needed to create sustainable communities.
Ultimately, we need to move away from an exclusive focus on housing unit delivery to a model of placemaking with the needs of local communities at its heart, and a model which includes truly affordable new homes for local people. This will take more than developer contributions, grant funding, council-level Grampian conditions, or Community Infrastructure Levies. We need a categoric requirement within the planning system to deliver infrastructure alongside homes. That’s how to win the argument for housing development - and create a better future.
Margaret Mullane is the Labour Member of Parliament for Dagenham and Rainham, first elected in 2024.
