National Planning Policy Framework consultation, deadline 10th March 2026, please respond!

A consultation is under way about revising the the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and other changes to the planning system. It is run by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). It would be very helpful if NBTA members would respond.

The consultation is online here https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/national-planning-policy-framework-proposed-reforms-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system The deadline is 11.45pm on 10th March 2026. It is a very long consultation, however you don’t need to respond to all of it. It would be really helpful if NBTA members would respond to Questions 48 and 48a as follows (you may also want to respond to Questions 49, 49a, 50, 50a, 51 and 51a). Send responses to PlanningPolicyConsultation@communities.gov.uk or use the online form https://consult.communities.gov.uk/planning/proposed-reforms-to-the-national-planning-policy-f/

Suggested answers:

Question 48 – strongly disagree

Question 48a – Chapter 6 of the consultation states “It is also essential to support a diverse range of accommodation and mix of tenures to speed up the building of homes, and create thriving and resilient communities across our towns, cities, and rural areas alike … This chapter sets out new proposals to meet these objectives. It … incorporates relevant policies from the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites, strengthens expectations around tenure mix and meeting a diverse range of housing needs…”

However, despite this statement, nowhere in the proposed revised Framework is there any reference to the provision of temporary and permanent residential moorings for boat dwellers, despite the requirement in Section 124 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 to assess the need for these. There is no reference to the minimal impact of residential moorings on the Green Belt, compared to bricks and mortar dwellings. There is no consideration of the fact that canals were historically industrial spaces and transport routes and therefore qualify as Grey Belt.

There is no consideration that the boat dwelling communities in England, both itinerant and static, are thriving, diverse and strong communities that these proposals ought to include. Finally there is no consideration of the benefits of introducing a new Use Class for residential moorings to reflect their significantly smaller environmental and visual impact compared to bricks and mortar dwellings. All of these considerations need to be included in the revised Framework.