1. RTPI planning convention 2015: The new politics for planning The politics of inequality: challenges for the profession(s) Michael Edwards, Bartlett School, UCL m.edwards@ucl.ac.uk Societycould.wordpress.com @michaellondonsf Images Edwards/Taylor

2. Scope: How the achievements, often egalitarian or emancipatory in intent, of planning come to be appropriated as commodities and can thus become tarnished, toxic, elements in a highly unequal, exploitative society – even instruments reinforcing inequality. –Green belts and fine protected landscapes –Conservation areas –Covent Garden Contemporary instances of these mechanisms at work –Viability testing in plan-making and development decisions –“social mix” policies in housing / estate “regeneration” –Agglomeration economies and the fashion for “cities” What is to be done? London Plan EiP in session (image: JustSpace.org.uk) 2

3. What happens to the achievements of planning? Green belts, AONB etc –Initial intents –Assimilation by property markets –Significance today 3 Edwards image

4. What happens to the achievements of planning? Conservation areas; [ environmental areas ] –Initial intents –Assimilation by property markets Ahlfeldt, Holman & Wendland, An assessment of the effects of conservation areas on value, LSE 2012 [ map extract below ] –Significance today Role in sorting by social class/income Protection from intensification 4

5. What happens to the achievements of planning? Covent Garden –Initial intents of defeat of GLC CDA plan –Assimilation by property markets Abolition of GLC  sale of GLC retail space by London Residuary Body Market allocation of space –Significance today A much-loved district Population & social housing double pre-plan levels Constrained corporate takeover 5 < Edwards GLC>

6. What happens to the achievements of planning? Mechanisms –Falling wage/salary share of GDP since mid-1970s –Growing inequality of incomes among households –Financialised surge of land and house prices All treated at length in –Edwards, M, Prospects for Housing, Land and Rent in the UK, part of the Government Office for Science’s Future of Cities project, 1 July 2015 societycould.wordpress.com societycould.wordpress.com –Or at –https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio ns/future-of-cities-land-rent-and-housing- in-uk-citieshttps://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio ns/future-of-cities-land-rent-and-housing- in-uk-cities 6

7. Contemporary instances of these mechanisms at work “Viability” testing George Turner v Shell, Canary Wharf Ltd, Qatar, Mayor, SoS Greenwich Peninsula Erosion of social housing provision Putting profitability ahead of all other considerations Strong critiques by –George Turner (Vauxhall Resident, reclaim.london) –Bob Colenutt (University of Northampton) –Stephen Hill (RICS etc) 7 Image:Just Space

8. Contemporary instances of these mechanisms at work “social mix” policies in housing / estate “regeneration” Selective application to council estates only Mask for expulsion of low-income communities Evidence base? –Cheshire’s “faith-based” critique –London EiP Panel recommendation rejected by Mayor Cross-party consensus cemented by Adonis 8 Heygate Estate Southwark Images: 35%

9. What is to be done? Growth? Growth of what? GDP/GVA? alternatives More critical self-reflection on history of planning, plans Compare with medicine: counter-indications Serious impact analysis on policies, projects Existing IIAs a joke, & not open to scrutiny Planners, elected members, inspectors really to pay attention to ordinary citizens, to ‘consultation’ Contempt too common, Aarhus and Gunning principles flouted Resources for citizen groups Be aware of what inoculates a plan against inequality Process issues Defence of social housing Bravery in confronting government and power Threat of TTIP PDR “affordability” Planning as a profession committed to serving the whole society systemic, cultural or professional? Structures are reproduced by agents… 9

10. Are we doing enough? No 10 Gypsies & travelers making representations at EiP 2010; image LGTU : 'In 1941 Lord Reith, who then was Minister..., asked the London County Council to prepare a plan and to work it out without paying overmuch respect to existing town planning law and all the other laws affecting building and industry but with a reasonable belief that if a good scheme was put forward it would provide reasons—indeed more than "reasons"— the impulse and determination to bring about whatever changes in law are needed to carry the plan into effect.’ The County of London Plan explained (1945)