Many of the NFU’s asks for planning reform to help modernise, regulate, expand, and diversify farms were not taken forward or considered, even though they would not jeopardise the government’s building ambitions.
ʼһwill be seeking answers from the government as to why farming has been forgotten or why it has been ignored.
The NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) is the highest-level planning policy in England.
All planning policies and decisions are based off the NPPF, and the changes announced this week form part of the government’s ambition to deliver millions more homes, commercial development, and infrastructure to spur economic growth.
Weakened protections for farmland
Changes include anticipated slashes to protections to agricultural land – protections that the NFU previously advocated for and temporarily secured in a previous draft. See how footnote 65 (formerly 63) has changed below:
“Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality land should be preferred to those of a higher quality. The availability of agricultural land used for food production should be considered, alongside the other policies in this Framework, when deciding what sites are most appropriate for development.”
“The lack of meaningful support for food production in the NPPF is a considerable missed opportunity.”
NFU Vice President Rachel Hallos
The changes will make it easier for developers and policy makers to designate, acquire, and obtain permission for non-agricultural development on farmland.
NFU Vice President Rachel Hallos has said the revised framework is “deeply concerning for British farmers”.
“While we welcome the exclusion of agricultural land from the new ‘grey belt’ designation and Previously Developed Land policy, these minor wins are overshadowed by greater threats,” she added.
Rachel said this removal of protections for BMV (Best and Most Versatile) farmland, combined with the currently uncertainty around inheritance tax, “will create further instability for tenanted farmers and those facing compulsory purchase of their land for new developments”.
Boost for new housing
There will be greater pressure on local authorities to meet new higher housing targets (70,000 more homes a year now expected going up to 370,000 per year), as well as commercial and energy developments.
The changes will make it easier for local authorities to designate farmland for non-agricultural development and for developers to build on farmland.
Grey belt now an official term
The ‘grey belt’ is is now a defined policy term, with the NFU’s suggestion that agriculture be excluded from the definition having been taken forward. ‘Beauty’ has also been removed as a policy term for new buildings.
Grey belt only applies to brownfield land in the green belt. The green belt, introduced in the 1930s, was designed to curb urban sprawl around cities. Building on green belt land is challenging, as developers must demonstrate ‘very special circumstances’ to obtain planning permission.
Brownfield land refers to areas previously occupied by permanent structures. The grey belt, a more recent concept introduced by the Labour government, identifies lower-quality areas within the green belt, such as car parks, wasteland, or petrol stations. According to the new planning framework, grey belt land contributes ‘little or no value to the purpose of the green belt’.
ʼһraised concerns at the suggestion agricultural holdings could be included in the definition due to the risk of farm holdings being targets for non-agricultural development, and the prospect of farms being seized under compulsory purchase powers.
Overall, changes will see many sites in the green belt now being opened up for development. Housing and commercial development will take the lion share of grey belt sites. Members with holdings in the grey belt will not see an increase in interest for their land due to this definition excluding agriculture and forestry.
What’s the impact on farming?
The new NPPF will open the door for development across the country, with farmers and landowners most likely seeing a massive new interest in their land. Compulsory purchases for non-agricultural development will rise, especially when expected changes to compensation are brought in via the Planning and Infrastructure Bill next year.
Farmers will also have to be aware of new neighbours from new housing developments. Residents moving into homes bordering farms can often have issues with general farming practices which produce noise, odour, vibrations, and lighting that they may not be used to.
Planning applications that are currently waiting for a decision may be delayed or paused while local planning authorities consider the new policy.
Local and neighbourhood plans may also be delayed, paused, and/or amended during this time.
Matters such as new towns, compensation for agricultural land obtained under compulsory purchase, and permitted development are not contained within the NPPF and have not been amended or changed.
A disappointing result for farming
The NPPF is not updated often, and when it is, it normally coincides with a change of strategy or thinking for the planning system. The most recent consultation in July 2024 offered the opportunity to raise issues that farming is facing from the planning system.
Reforms proposed by the NFU such as food production becoming a weighted economic argument, as well as support for agricultural infrastructure and diversification were not taken forward.
ʼһfeels that this let down by the government again leaves agriculture waiting for reform, all the while farmers struggle to get the most basic planning applications approved.
It is known that the government’s current priorities are to build, and not with farming. The NFU’s opinion is that there is no reason why planning reform for farming cannot happen alongside the government’s building targets.
This is made all the more important due to the anticipated land pressures that will be faced by landowners from new developments of towns, infrastructure, and commercial development. If farmland is to disappear, then existing sites must be allowed to expand and become more efficient and profitable.
ʼһVice President concluded: “The lack of meaningful support for food production in the NPPF is a considerable missed opportunity. At a time when food security and self-sufficiency are vital, failing to protect BMV land undermines the future of British agriculture. If any farmland is sacrificed to development, the government must ensure that remaining farms are more profitable and therefore more sustainable.
“ʼһremains committed to protecting rural livelihoods and ensuring agriculture isn’t side lined in the pursuit of economic growth. The upcoming National Land Use Strategy must address these challenges and secure a resilient, adaptable and food-secure nation.”
If you have any questions about the new National Planning Policy Framework, please contact yourlocal NFU representativeor our CallFirst service on0370 845 8458.
More from ʼһ:
New planning regulations for short-term holiday lets