If property delegates at last week’s Labour party conference travelled in search of mitigation, the greater numbers in Manchester for the Conservative party bash were in search of something altogether different.
There were no calls for reining back as there had been in Brighton; what was sought this week was a commitment from ministers to go further and faster on many headline policies.
But before anyone had the chance to press, they had to push through a throng of protestors. Unlike at some recent events, it has to be said, the property community was not singled out. Everyone in a suit in Manchester city centre on Sunday, in the eyes of some protestors, was scum.
This lively start to events appeared to galvanise guests at a second party conference dinner staged by Mishcon de Reya and supported by Estates Gazette.
Into the firing line stepped housing minister Brandon Lewis. Facing him were former ministers Mark Prisk and Steve Norris, as well as deputy London mayor Sir Edward Lister and Westminster city council deputy leader Robert Davis.
Across the table were developers, including Urban Splash’s Tom Bloxham, Essential Living’s Martin Bellinger and The Collective’s Reza Merchant, among others. None gave him an easy ride.
Lewis promised to go further but he did little to convince those round the table that he would go faster – or at least fast enough.
The minister suggested measures in this month’s housing bill would speed up planning and offer greater certainty around permitted development rights but hinted that, with the industry split over the need for a separate use class for PRS, he was yet to be persuaded of the need for change.
Nevertheless, recognising that striking agreements on payments was one of the biggest causes of delays in the planning system, he promised: “We are going to review the CIL this year and how it works in relation to section 106.”
But faced by calls from councillor Davis for further investment in the planning system, he said he would not give councils the power to set their own fees.
Instead he had other ideas. Councils could share planning resources, he suggested, and clearly Lewis expects councils and developers to work better together to deliver on all fronts. “Not everything requires primary legislation,” he insisted.
For others round the table, this was tinkering while demand for homes burned.
The mayor of London’s £1m Domesday book, listing all public sector land in the capital and expected next year, would bring transparency. But, in the eyes of Pocket Living founder Marc Vlessing, without a commitment to housebuilding at scale we would merely be running to stand still.
What was required alongside this, said New West End Company chairman Sir Peter Rogers and Arup director Alexander Jan, was a radical restructuring of government.
Advocating incentives for local authorities to support development by allowing them to retain more receipts locally, Jan said: “Local authorities need more control over their financial destiny. If they are more closely to connected to the vibrancy of their areas, they will behave differently.”
And in case anyone believed devolution would deliver on this front, Rogers was dismissive: “Devolution focuses on delegation from central government. It’s not genuine. It’s the devolution of responsibility and authority, not power.”
Should the property industry be optimistic? Just hours after the dinner wrapped up the chancellor said he would allow councils to set business rates and keep the £26bn they raise, in a move to revitalise high streets. Radicalism could be on the agenda.
The guests round the table were not short of radical ideas to speed up delivery of development and housing
• Replace planning with zoning
• Drop emphasis on best value in procurement
• Cut planning authorities to county and unitary councils or city regions
• Take housing associations seriously as enablers
• Focus on vocational qualifications – ad campaigns and awards for bricklayers and other skilled workers
• Give city mayors responsibility for local services in return for fiscal autonomy
• Run local referendums asking voters whether they are pro- or anti-development
