好色先生TV

In the end all the talk of the government ripping up the Green Belt was, if you forgive the colourful mix of metaphors, a red herring. Communities secretary Eric Pickles鈥� announcement last week on housing and growth proposed no changes to law or regulation that would impact the protected areas which surround the UK鈥檚 major conurbations, despite the pre-briefings and comments by the chancellor George Osborne.

However, , which the government claims will deliver 70,000 homes and 140,000 new jobs, may have signalled something far more significant. Because many of the basket of 15 or more separate measures echoed a common - unstated - theme: the re-taking of power from local authorities by a government that just two years ago ripped up the planning system to introduce localism. Housebuilders are now asking if the shift - contained in a series of measures outlined last week - could be the moment the government seriously changes course.

The reason for the change in direction can be seen clearly in a skim of the last , which shows the granting of residential planning permissions in England at a three-year low of just 24,872. Housing starts have also fallen by about 20% in the first half of 2012, according to the latest government data.

The changes which could be seen to fall under a shift away from localism are manifold. Pickles鈥� announcement revealed that the government will legislate to allow the planning inspectorate (PINS) to take over planning decisions from local authorities that have 鈥渃onsistently poor performance鈥� in the speed or quality of decisions. It will also allow PINS to penalise councils that turn applications down knowing this will be overturned on appeal - by awarding costs against them. And more types of applications will be diverted to the National Infrastructure Planning branch of PINS, away from local councils. In general the measures outlined last week start to introduce real penalties if local authorities don鈥檛 behave how the centre - the government - wants them to.

In addition, developers will have more time to build out planning applications, and the government will legislate to allow developers to appeal against section 106 planning agreements which are demonstrably holding back projects. Small builders will benefit from a promised extension of permitted development rights, taking decisions on most home extensions out of councils鈥� hands. Finally the government will lead a review of the profusion of local standards which housebuilders claim pile extra regulatory burdens on their schemes. Roger Humber, strategic policy adviser to the House Builders鈥� Association, says: 鈥淲e鈥檝e seen the fastest running up of the white flag over localism we could have ever imagined. Localism鈥檚 dead and top-down planning is back with a vengeance.鈥�

We鈥檝e seen the fastest running up of the white flag over localism we could have ever imagined

Roger Humber, House Builders鈥� Association

The issue is a vital one for housebuilders. The regional housing targets of the Labour administration were ditched within the first few days of the coalition on a promise from ministers that local decision-making would be a more effective way of delivering homes. Ministers assured those housebuilders nervous that localism wasn鈥檛 going to work, that councils would make the right decisions if a proper framework and incentives were in place. This led them to create the New Homes Bonus, which rewarded councils with more grant for homes started, and the pro-development National Planning Policy Framework. So the feeling of retreat is compounded by last week鈥檚 ministerial re-shuffle which cleared out from the communities department the entire team - Grant Shapps, Bob Neil and Greg Clark - that had delivered these localist reforms.

Dermot Finch, head of public affairs for lobbyist Fishburn Hedges, and formerly a Treasury mandarin and director of the Centre for Cities think tank, says: 鈥淢inisters had said they would put in place incentives and things would be fine. Well, it looks like the New Homes Bonus hasn鈥檛 been enough to change nimby councils鈥� mind. It looks like with the Treasury and the recession breathing down their neck, the government has beaten a partial retreat from pure localism.

鈥淚n the current environment, when localism goes head-to-head with growth in terms of priorities at the top of government, growth will win.鈥�

This is not to say that the reforms outlined last week will overturn the reforms of the Localism Act, or make an immediate huge change to the system. But, in a week in which a survey by contractor Willmott Dixon showed that 40% of local councillors don鈥檛 trust businesses to help deliver local economic growth, it does demonstrate the desire at the top of the coalition to force councils to be more pro private sector. Chris Tinker, regeneration director at Crest Nicholson, who hosted prime minister David Cameron and deputy prime minister Nick Clegg on one of the firm鈥檚 sites for last week鈥檚 launch, says: 鈥淚t鈥檚 not the end of localism. But it is about the proper balance of power between centralism and localism. It鈥檚 an intolerance from central government of a lack of performance.鈥�

Alan Brown, Cala Group chief executive, says: 鈥淚t鈥檚 about local authorities taking responsibility, and the government stepping up what is in the NPPF. They鈥檙e saying, 鈥榠f you don鈥檛 play by the rules we鈥檒l take the power off you.鈥欌�� Rob Perrins, managing director of Berkeley Group, says the moves are welcome but it is too early to say if they will be effective. 鈥淲hether it will make a difference will depend how they define poor performance by local authorities. It could very helpful if it鈥檚 effective, but so far we鈥檝e had a lot of theory and very little delivery.鈥�

Even Humber, who says the moves 鈥渇inally鈥� show the government moving in the right direction, admits there is plenty of devil in the detail. Success, he says, will depend on how the specific pieces of legislation are drafted, and if civil servants can fend off pressure from the anti-development lobby.

The industry will hope the new ministers have the commitment to push through the government鈥檚 new stance.