NPPF 2026 – CalComms’ Briefing Note
Introduction
The Government today (17 August 2026) has published its new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), following a weekend of press briefings promoting plans for a default presumption in favour of approval for homes near train stations, and protections for pubs which have been on the market for less than a year.
Even before the Plan was published Conservative and Reform politicians were raising concerns about communities seeing less opportunities to object to applications, in seeming opposition to Andy Burnham’s own devolution agenda. The initial political response is set out in more detail below.
Key changes from 2024
The 2026 NPPF is seeking to shift the planning culture away from managing growth, to actively enabling it – with development in sustainable locations in and around the existing transport infrastructure being prioritised and promoted. The key changes are:
A presumption in favour of sustainable development, with a clearer presumption that development in sustainable locations should be approved unless the adverse impacts substantially outweigh the benefits – a stronger policy basis for approving development.
Clear and strong support for development around rail stations – including promoting development in some Green Belt locations around stations.
The Grey Belt is now embedded within strategic planning linked to sustainable locations and unmet local needs – whilst introducing a formal methodology for identifying Grey Belt.
Promoting density, with minimum density standards around train stations – requiring developments to make efficient use of land and even indicating that schemes could be refused if they fail to make efficient use of this land.
A greater focus on growth, with the NPPF attaching “substantial weight” to infrastructure projects such as data centres, renewable energy, and freight and logistics facilities – reflecting the Government's wider economic growth and infrastructure agenda.
What does the NPPF mean for political and community engagement?
The NPPF has some important changes to pre-application consultation – implying that developer-led pre-application consultation is no longer simply a procedural exercise but rather will now play an important part in the planning merits of the scheme.
Policy DM1 requires major applications to undertake “proportionate” pre-application engagement and explain how schemes have changed as a result. Interestingly, Policy DM3 then requires councillors to take account of the issues raised during the pre-application engagement, including positive responses.
Earlier engagement is now likely to become more valuable, with the NPPF encouraging early dialogue and iterative design. The most successful consultation programmes will likely:
Engage with communities and stakeholders before the proposals are entrenched
Clearly explain the planning need
Identify areas where change can come out of the consultation process
Document how the consultation process influenced the final design
DM3 requires councillors to take account of positive responses coming out of the consultation. This strengthens the importance of meaningful consultation by recognising not only objections but also evidence of support and scheme improvements coming out of the engagement process.
Political responses (so far)
There have already been some responses to the new NPPF from across the political spectrum. Labour’s planning reforms are placing greater weight on delivering housing and growth, but criticism from the Conservatives and Reform has so far focused on preserving local control over development decisions.
This morning, Sir James Cleverly (Shadow Housing Secretary), expressed criticism focusing on local democratic control. In an article in today’s Telegraph, he said Labour is "seizing control from local communities and forcing them to accept development in the wrong areas."[1]
In the Guardian, Cleverly also stated: “To try to fix their own mess, Labour are planning a power grab, seizing control from local communities and forcing them to accept development in the wrong areas because Labour won’t build in the right areas. Labour’s planning power grab is exposing our green belt and countryside to unauthorised Traveller sites, and ministers are turning a blind eye.”
Also in the Guardian, ReformUK’s Deputy Leader Richard Tice said the plans were “in direct contradiction of Andy Burnham’s devolution agenda”.
“Far from empowering local councils who actually know their communities, they strip power from the people who live there and hand it to Whitehall so ministers can ram through major housing developments while sidelining residents and ignoring the infrastructure that already can’t cope,” he said.[2]
Conclusion
The clearest message of the 2026 NPPF is that the Government now expects sustainable development to be facilitated, not resisted. Successful applications are likely therefore to depend increasingly on demonstrating alignment with national growth objectives and meaningful engagement, alongside robust mitigation of local impacts.