Consultation Responses

This sets out the BPF’s views on aspects of the draft guidance for local authorities undertaking High Street Rental Auctions, and is a supplementary response to the main consultation response that was submitted via an online survey tool.

Our response supports the Government’s ambition to speed up plan-making but notes it will be important that local authorities get the resources they need if this is going to be achieved in practice. We also argue that an effective system of incentives needs to be built into the new system and that ambitions to speed up plan-making would be more achievable if we had a strategic planning tier.

Our response sets out a range of recommendations for how our planning system should change to better support industrial and logistics, including calling for the reintroduction of strategic planning and improving the local plan process for this part of the sector. Our various asks are supported by practical examples of the challenges of bringing forward industrial and logistics schemes across the country.

The Government is consulting on changes to the Business Rates Empty Property Relief in order to reduce opportunities for avoidance. Based on new data on typical vacancy periods, we do not think the reforms suggested are appropriate, and we have suggested that the Government should instead increase the Empty Property Relief from 3-6 months to closer to 12 months, to better reflect typical vacancy periods in the market. We have also suggested reinstating the 50% discount after the initial EPR period will better support property owners with longer term vacant units and reduce incentives for empty rates mitigation activity.

Our response sets out our members' views on the suite of changes to the existing permitted development rights regime proposed in a consultation from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC). We argue that the piecemeal approach to reform will likely negatively impact our town centres and make it harder to bring forward larger schemes and more cohesive forms of development.

The BPF has responded to the Housing and Planning All Party Parliamentary Group’s (APPG) Inquiry on developer contributions. The APPG’s call for evidence is gathering views on ways the existing Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and S106 can be improved and alternative paths of reform to the proposed introduction of a future Infrastructure Levy.

Setting out our view on protecting tax revenues and supporting compliance within the construction sector. 

Our response to the UK Government's consultation on a potential Infrastructure Levy. We note our fundamental concerns with the design of the new proposed levy and highlight that it could result in a more complicated system of developer contributions which will likely slow down the development process and undermine the delivery of associated infrastructure.

We responded to a UK Government consultation on the introduction of a new UK based fund vehicle, known as the Reserved Investor Fund – this is one of the workstreams coming out of the Government’s review of the funds industry.

Our response to Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities' consultation on Environmental Outcomes Reports.

We responded to the Valuations Office Agency’s (VOA) consultation on disclosure – sharing information on business rates valuations.

Our response to HM Revenue and Customs' consultation on the Value Added Tax treatment of energy saving materials (ESM).