28/07/2026
On Wednesday 22nd July 2026, Test Valley Borough Council decided to change the direction of the Draft Local Plan* from the ‘legacy’ plan-making system to the new ‘gateway’ plan-making system. I voted for this change in direction.
This is an important decision, and I thought it worthwhile to explain why I voted the way I did. The following is my understanding of the situation.
1. What does this change in direction mean, and what are the implications for our communities?
Whichever plan-making system we opt for, it is not an immediate solution to stemming the tide of speculative housing applications that we are currently experiencing all over the Test Valley. With continuing changes in Government policy the Borough Council, and Councillors in particular, have now lost much of the power they used to have in helping their communities fight inappropriate developments. Irrespective of whether we opt for a legacy or the new gateway system, we will continue to see a wave of speculative applications in countryside locations where infrastructure is poor until such time we have met the five-year housing supply target. Unfortunately it is now likely that the Borough Council will also not meet its completion target (net completion of houses over the past three years) due to the lack of actual house building which would automatically continue the assumption in favour of development even with a Local Plan and a five-year housing supply.
Additionally, it is my understanding that from October this year we, as Councillors, will be taken out of the process of decision making for all planning applications. It will be up to the planning officers to make the recommendations and Borough Councillors will no longer be able to call applications to Committee where Councillors can make the final decision. In addition, any developments for over 150 houses in the future can be referred to the Secretary of State if the recommendation is for refusal. We are therefore exposed to continuing applications and land banking by developers across the Test Valley without having the power to refuse them.
With these changes and the increasing lead times for Local Plan inspection under the legacy system, we will continue to be exposed to speculative planning applications for several years.
2. What can we do? Should we just give up?
No, of course not. It is becoming even more critical that local communities work with their Borough Councillors to fight inappropriate developments and to communicate the local challenges to the planning officers, as well as develop their own NDPs (Neighbourhood Development Plans). We know that a bus stop doesn’t mean there are buses running, that there will be more traffic due to the rat runs through our villages, as well as the safety risks for walkers. We also know where the flooding takes place, or how difficult it is to get children into local schools or be registered at a local GP practice.
I see my role as Borough Councillor in facilitating this process and offering advice and guidance, as well as offering a communication channel into the Council and its planning officers. We all need to continue to fight for our countryside and rural villages.
3. Why the change of direction from ‘legacy’ to new ‘gateway’ plan making system?
In simple terms, the Government continues to move the goal posts for local plan-making and the planning process, at the same time as continuing with Local Government Reorganisation. Both these Government-instigated changes do not align, and are not clearly defined yet. As a result we find ourselves navigating a process full of uncertainties, imposed deadlines and unrealistic expectations.
To understand the situation better, let’s go back to the beginning:
DECEMBER 2024: The Labour Government issued a new Planning Policy Framework (PPF) in which it mandated local authorities to increase their housing supply. Traditionally Test Valley had always done well in consulting local communities, and before December 2024 the authority had a plan that would have easily delivered the mandated five-year housing supply thus providing communities with the protection from speculative planning applications. Overnight, the five-year housing supply disappeared as a result of the Government mandating an additional 78% houses to be built.
At the time of the changes in December 2024, Test Valley Borough Council was close to submitting its Draft 19 Local Plan for inspection. Unfortunately due to the timing of the Test Valley planning process (other local authorities were on different plan timetables) the Council found itself in a difficult position, and therefore wrote to the Government to ask for transitional arrangements. Transitional arrangements would have let the Council achieve a plan that ensured a systematic and consultative approach to planning across the Test Valley. The Government's response refused to consider any transitional arrangements.
Test Valley Borough Council therefore had to deal with the situation it was presented with.
To find the additional housing numbers, the Council set about finding additional areas in the Borough that could be developed. The only way of meeting the very tight timetable imposed by the Government was to review development plots which formed part of the SHELAA (Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment; the document that contains all the land that had previously been promoted to the Borough Council by landowners as potential development land) and which during the previous Local Plan-making process were dismissed as not suitable. The SHELAA land was therefore reviewed again, setting the bar of acceptability lower than it had been originally, in order to make up for the missing housing numbers and meet the tight timeframe for submitting the Local Plan to inspectors by the end of 2026. The resulting draft Local Plan 18 went to public consultation in July 2025.
The consultation and particularly the parcels of land around Weyhill and Stockbridge met with much public criticism. During the consultation some of the land in Weyhill, Stockbridge and Appleshaw was withdrawn by the landowners leading to a shortfall of around 800 houses for the Local Plan. In addition, the large number of comments received as part of the process had to be processed, read and considered. In addition, the Borough Council was offered additional housing sites as part of the consultation process. All this information had to be processed and analysed.
After further consideration it was decided that a further public consultation would need to take place in order to consider any further housing allocations that would make up the shortfall of 800 houses. This would then put at risk the deadline of submitting the Draft 19 Local Plan to the inspectors at the end of 2026. If the deadline could not be met (which was very likely), a considerable amount of resources would be wasted.
Another option would be to ask the Government for an extension. This was a possibility but not guaranteed by any means. If we were to gain an extension to the Draft Local Plan submission deadline, and with the inspection timelines having extended considerably, it was becoming unlikely that we would have a fully approved plan before April 2028 when Test Valley Borough Council would cease to exist. With no guidance in place on what will happen to Local Plans as part of the transition to unitary authorities, this option became risky, too.
Our future partners in the new Mid Hampshire Unitary Council, East Hampshire District Council and Wi******er City Council, have decided to pursue the new ‘gateway’ system for the Local Plan process now. New Forest is also considering it.
Bearing in mind the uncertainties and risks, as well as any benefits associated with continuing with the legacy system, the large number of speculative applications coming through and the Government's latest changes to the decision making powers of Councillors, I voted for the recommendation to change direction and embark on the new ‘gateway’ local planning system that would align us to the new world of unitary authorities and mayoral authority sooner rather than later. It will allow us to look towards the future.
This does not prevent any of the speculative applications coming through the system, but nor would a legacy planning system.
It could be argued that we as Borough Councillors should just refuse to do any of it, and refuse any applications coming through. Not preparing a Local Plan would just mean that the Government would mandate it and we would have no influence on its direction. Just refusing planning applications is also not an option as appeals can be launched by developers which will be decided by a Government-employed inspector and the Council would have to bear the cost if the appeal is successful, thus wasting taxpayers’ (i.e. our) money.
As I said during my statement at Council, ‘we are between a rock and a hard place’. In the end we all need to work closely with our communities and fight within a system that is stacked against us all.
4. The Lib Dems abstained on the vote and accused the Borough Council as missing the boat
I try not to make these posts political, but in this instance I have to counter some of the arguments.
The Lib Dems argued at Council that Test Valley Borough Council could have done more and should have had a Local Plan submitted earlier. Their argument was that Lib Dem Wi******er City Council had an approved plan.
Wi******er City had an approved plan because they were on a different timetable. Test Valley had an agreed process that would have delivered a Local Plan in plenty of time but the Government issued a new housing target in December 2024.
Abstaining from a critical vote like this is, in my view, not taking responsibility.
* A Local Plan is an official document created by the local council. It sets out a vision, rules, and a 15-year framework for future housing, business, roads, and environmental protection in an area. Councils use it as the main guide to decide on planning applications.
