The National Policy Forum report for 2025 is now available. Follow this link: https://nationalpolicyforum.labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-NPF-consultation-documents_COMPLETE.pdf

The Dorset Plan 2026 has just finished its consultation phase. Please find below the CLP response.

Mid Dorset and North Poole Labour Party response to Dorset Plan

Question 1: Do you have any comments on the proposed Vision for Dorset?

The Dorset Local Plan claims to deliver a “fairer, more sustainable” future – but in reality it puts developers first, not communities. Housing targets are excessive, eating up green fields while failing to provide homes ordinary people can afford. This is already clearly in evidence in the East Dorset area. Infrastructure and services will lag behind, leaving working families to pay the price. Sustainability is sacrificed to profit, and democracy is ignored. The Labour alternatives prioritise real social housing, protection of nature, strong public services, and genuine community control.

Question 2: Do you have any comments on the proposed strategic priorities for the Local Plan?

We strongly object to the strategic priorities as currently framed: they privilege growth, landowner interests, and market forces over communities, equality, and the environment.

1.        Priority of growth for the few over fairness for the many
One of the priorities is effectively to drive more housing and employment growth. But growth must not mean speculative development that benefits the few. The priorities must explicitly place social housing, rent control, and land value capture ahead of private profits. Unless the strategic priorities specifically name working people, renters and vulnerable households, the plan will reproduce inequality.

2.        Ambiguity in the concept of sustainability
“Sustainability” is too vague a priority. It should mean protecting the environment, reducing energy demand, and rejecting developments that worsen carbon emissions or destroy farmland, not simply greenwashing more construction. The priorities must include zero net carbon, biodiversity protection, and climate resilience, not just “balanced development”.

3.        Infrastructure and services must be first, not an afterthought
The plan’s priorities must clearly state that investment in public transport, health, education, social care and community facilities comes before or along with new development. Without that, new housing becomes a burden on existing communities, pushing costs onto already vulnerable communities.

4.        Real democracy
Another priority should be community control, transparency, and binding local decision-making. The current wording treats “engagement” as a box to tick. The strategic priorities must guarantee that local bodies and neighbourhoods genuinely shape where and what gets built, not decisions made behind closed doors by planning officers or developers. There are all the town and parish councils, not to mention the  many voluntary and third sector organisations who are already fully engaged with community and development, who should be incorporated into local planning decisions.

5.        Inequality must be tackled, not entrenched
Rural and coastal areas already face higher costs, worse services, and fewer opportunities. The priorities must commit to redistribute investment, public transport connectivity, and local job creation to counteract peripheral disadvantage, not just focus on strengthening “strategic towns” at the expense of outlying communities.

Question 7: Do you have any comments on the proposed strategy for the Eastern area?

East Dorset has already had significant housing expansion, and the strategy focusses far too heavily on further housing development without specified measures to upscale local services in health care, transport and recreation. The contribution of developers to create SANGs, is a cheap opt out, when the main sports and leisure facility has been closed and there has been no road development, or increase in primary care capacity.

1. Housing justice
The focus on so-called “affordable housing” is misleading. Homes priced at 80 % of inflated market values are still out of reach for nurses, carers, teachers, and young families. What East Dorset needs is a serious programme of publicly owned, council-led social housing — homes for rent at genuinely affordable levels linked to local wages, not developer margins. Dorset Council must set firm targets for social housing delivery and prevent developers using “viability” loopholes to water them down. Without this, our towns and villages will continue to lose local people and key workers.

2. Infrastructure first
Growth must not outstrip services. Roads, GP surgeries, schools, public transport, water, and broadband are already under strain. No large development should proceed until the supporting infrastructure is funded and in place. Promises buried in masterplans are meaningless without binding delivery conditions and transparent public reporting. Dorset residents should not subsidise the profits of private housebuilders.

3. Environment and climate
The plan pays lip service to sustainability while permitting greenfield sprawl that will damage landscapes and increase car dependency. All new housing should meet zero-carbon standards, deliver ecological net gain, and contribute to climate resilience. Anything less undermines Dorset’s own climate commitments.

4. Democracy and accountability
This strategy is being imposed from above, offering consultation without real power. Communities should have decisive control over what is built, where, and for whom. We call for transparent publication of all developer contributions, binding local housing need assessments, and community representation in monitoring and enforcement. Development should serve public interest, not speculative gain.

5. A fairer plan for Dorset
To be credible, the strategy must be rewritten to:
– Put social housing before market housing;
– Guarantee infrastructure before development;
– Enforce environmental protection with legal strength;
– Empower local communities to shape growth.

As it stands, the draft plan risks deepening housing inequality, straining already fragile services, and degrading Dorset’s natural environment. Dorset Council must choose whether it stands with developers or with residents who want decent homes, fair investment, and a sustainable future. A Labour approach would put social justice, public ownership, and community power at the heart of the Western Area strategy — not on its margins.

Question 8: Is there any important infrastructure that needs to be delivered alongside new homes in the Western/Central/South Eastern/Northern areas?

Yes — significant infrastructure investment is essential, and it must be publicly owned, democratically managed, and environmentally responsible. New housing should be supported by infrastructure that serves social need rather than private profit.

1.        Public transport and connectivity
The whole of Dorset has weak bus links and limited rail access. New development must therefore include a publicly funded, frequent, affordable and integrated transport system, with better bus routes between Blandford, Wareham and the other larger villages with the Bournemouth and Poole conurbation. Active travel — walking and cycling — should be built into every scheme, reducing car dependence and supporting low-carbon living.

2.        Health, education and care services
Local people already struggle to access GPs, dentists, and care provision. Each new housing area should therefore include public health centres, schools, and care facilities, built at the same pace as new homes. These must be permanently funded and operated within the public sector.

3.        Utilities and communications
Dorset’s infrastructure for water, sewage, and broadband is under strain. These systems must be modernised and publicly accountable, ensuring clean water, reliable waste treatment, and universal high-speed internet as basic rights — not profit sources for private utilities.

4.        Green and resilient infrastructure
Given local flood risks and coastal erosion, investment should focus on natural flood defences, reforestation, and community green spaces. Public parks, allotments, and ecological corridors must form a core part of the planning framework, safeguarding biodiversity and public wellbeing.

5.        Energy and housing standards
All new developments should achieve zero-carbon standards, with community-owned renewable energy systems such as solar cooperatives or district heating networks. High-quality insulation and sustainable materials should be mandatory to lower bills and emissions. Solar panels should become a standard feature in new homes.

6.        Democratic control and fair funding
Infrastructure decisions must involve meaningful participation from residents, workers, and local organisations. Development levies should be directed toward social and environmental infrastructure, not private developer subsidies. Dorset Council should create participatory planning forums to ensure ongoing accountability.

Question 9: The Local Plan sets out a strategy to meet the area’s housing needs through allocating sites for new homes, the flexible settlements policy, new settlements and the efficient use of land. Are there any other measures that could help to meet housing needs?

The ‘efficient use of land’ is far too vague and begs questions about what types of land are envisaged. It is therefore difficult to respond to this question. However, the strategy for the allocating of sites for home building needs to be reframed to place social justice, ecological limits, public provision and democracy at its core, otherwise it will simply reproduce housing inequalities.

There is particular concern with the flexible settlements policy. With small building programmes of, say, up to 30/40 homes in a particular the likelihood of any of these being in the low cost or social housing categories is going to be remote, unless the Council puts mandatory targets for such housing into the overall flexible settlement strategy. 

 The Plan is premised on the assumption that growth and house-building by private developers will deliver for working people—but it won’t. Firstly, allocating sites alone does not guarantee genuinely affordable, secure homes. Without prioritising social housing, rent control or land value capture, most of what’s built will be sucked up by investors, commuters, or those already advantaged, worsening housing inequality.

The proportion of homes built that the meet needs of the local population is wholly inadequate. It fails to recognise that Dorset has one of the worst ratios of average income to average house prices in the country. The council should be explicitly emulating the housebuilding records of the best councils in the country, where over 55% of new homes are social housing.

Secondly, the strategy fails to account for environmental and social limits. Expanding into greenfield and protected land externalises ecological costs onto communities. The plan must require building first on public land, brownfield sites, and through co-operative / non-profit models, before encroaching on nature.

Thirdly, the plan presumes infrastructure will catch up—but in practice, residents pay the price in overcrowded services, transport chaos, and stretched amenities. The strategy should only permit allocations when public services and infrastructure are guaranteed in advance.

Finally, decision-making about which sites are chosen is opaque and beholden to landowners. Our response requires community control to veto allocations that harm existing communities.

Question 10: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the Plan including a lower housing target for the first few years and a higher figure towards the end of the plan period to meet housing needs?

We recognise that financial pressures are great and that any strategy must be based on robust analysis of what there will be available to invest from the Council, apart from the  private sector. However we see no evidence in the plan of finances. We would urge that any approach such as suggested includes a tapering of the building programme in favour of low cost housing first. The Council also needs to be aware that delaying delivery in early years merely compounds waiting lists, increases homelessness, pushes up rents and intensifies inequality.

The Labour alternative rejects this suggestion of  phasing: rather we need steady, guaranteed delivery of social and council housing from day one, backed by public investment and land value capture to subsidise affordability. Housing targets must be front-loaded, not back-loaded, so that the most vulnerable are not forced to wait.

The plan should specifically recognise the strategies adopted by the best performing councils across the country.