Minister rejects council bid to pull out of Greater Manchester joint development plan

The Housing and Planning Minister has refused to grant Oldham Council's request to be excluded from a joint development plan, which was agreed upon among nine Greater Manchester authorities last year.

In a letter sent on Tuesday, Housing and Planning Minister Matthew Pennycook told Oldham's leader, Cllr Arooj Shah, that he "sees no justification" to approve the request.

The Greater Manchester councils approved the Places for Everyone joint development plan in March 2024, following almost a decade of planning.

The plan, which originally stemmed from the first Greater Manchester Spatial Framework in 2016, covers a period up to 2039 and aims to deliver a minimum of 175,000 homes, which amounts to an annual average of around 10,305 new dwellings.

A total of 11,500 new homes would be built in Oldham under the plan.  

However, opposition councillors narrowly won a vote to pull out of the scheme in February this year over fears about green belt allocations.

The council's ensuing letter to the Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner, consisted of a single sentence, which read: "At an extraordinary meeting of Oldham Council on 12th February 2025, Council instructed us to write to you to request that you revoke the Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan as it applies to the Borough of Oldham, under the powers given to you by Section 25 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004."

The decision came after full council discussed withdrawal in an earlier meeting in November 2024, where councillors were warned that the move could expose the local authority to a judicial review.

At the November meeting, councillors raised concerns that the joint plan was based on outdated housing need calculations, would see "irreplaceable loss of Green Belt sites and green spaces", and failed to provide guarantees on delivering affordable and socially rented homes.

An officer's report concluded that "none of the concerns provide sufficient justification" to request that the Secretary of State revoke the plan as it related to Oldham.

The report added: "Therefore, were it to be challenged via Judicial Review and the concerns listed were the basis of the Council's decision, it would be considered legally perverse and unreasonable, and consequently the reasons for the revocation request would be unlawful."

In refusing Oldham's request, Pennycook said: "The government has been clear in its commitment to the plan-led system. Local plans provide the stability and certainty that communities, businesses, and developers want to see the planning system deliver."

He later added: "In this context, PfE is an example of authorities doing the right thing – adopting a robust local plan only a year ago, which reflects strong cooperation between authorities across the plan area, including cross-boundary allocations such as the Stakehill site that Oldham shares with a neighbouring authority.

"Taking all of the above into account, and given that your letter does not set out a case for revocation, I see no justification to approve your request."

Pennycook meanwhile said Oldham "may wish" to provide further reasons and justification for revocation.

The leader of the Conservative party at Oldham, Cllr Max Woodvine, has since claimed that the letter sent to the Government to request withdrawal "did not represent the wishes of Full Council and did not provide any justification whatsoever" for the request.

Labour Cllr Elaine Taylor, Oldham's Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Decent Homes, said: "We're grateful the Government have seen through the reckless attempts made by the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives to put our green belt at risk. 

"As far as the administration is concerned this we agree with the Government that this is the right decision for Oldham."

She added that Places for Everyone is a “brownfield first plan” that protects 97.5% of green belt in Oldham and will deliver “much needed homes” for residents.

Adam Carey