Harold Wilson famously said, “A week is a long time in politics” and so it would seem if the events of last week are anything to go by.

On Monday, 19 July, just two hours before Watford Council were due to consider moving our draft local plan to the next stage, Councillors received a letter from our MP, which cast doubt on the basis of Watford’s housing needs assessment set out in the draft plan. In his letter Mr Russell stated that ‘the standard method (of determining housing need) is only the starting point for identifying housing need in a local area’ and ‘the local plan is an opportunity to present a reasonable and credible alternative option’.

The MP’s last-minute letter naturally raised considerable concern. The draft local plan has been more than seven years in the making, due mainly to previous Government changes in the calculation of Watford’s housing figures. A change of direction at this advanced stage would have resulted in further long delays and would consign many thousands of hours of work by officers and expert advisers to the bin.

Our response therefore was to follow the doctrine of ‘trust but verify’. We immediately sought expert opinion on the matter and were reassured that our original interpretation of the relevant planning legislation was correct. So, in the light of this, Watford Council agreed the draft plan and voted for it to go forward to examination in public.

On the following day, Tuesday, July 20, the Government published a revised version of their National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This makes it absolutely clear that there is no scope for avoiding housing targets, except in exceptional circumstances, for example if most of your buildings are listed as world heritage assets or you have protected sites of special scientific interest (See NPPF July 20, 2021, paragraph 61).

It is interesting to ponder the extremely late timing of our MP’s intervention. Mr Russell has not previously made any representations to the public consultations on the draft plan despite the long consultation period. The wording of his letter appears to be an attempt to duck responsibility for the consequences of the Government algorithm, which leads to very high-density development on our few available brownfield development sites, and to blame the Liberal Democrat administration in Watford for the inevitable consequences of the Government’s own policies.

Finally, responding to the two letters in last Friday’s Watford Observer, one from our MP and one from the Vice Chair of the local Conservative Party. If Mr Russell is genuinely concerned about the impact of over development on the character of Watford, the best course of action would be for him to challenge the standard method of calculating housing need. This could result in a significant reduction of housing targets for already densely populated boroughs like Watford. If Mr Russell believes Watford’s housing target is too high, why hasn’t he convinced Conservative ministers that it should be cut?

Our draft local plan will now be submitted for formal examination in public.

Cllr Stephen Johnson

Portfolio Holder for Planning

Cllr Peter Jeffree

Development Management Committee Chair, Watford Borough Council