The Buckinghamshire Local Plan (part 1 of 5)

Land within certain protected designations in the green belt cannot be classified as grey belt. That protection comes from what we call footnote 7. Now the government's proposed NPPF 2025, which I think the consultation runs out on the 10th of March this year, proposes to remove footnote number 7 from the grey belt definition indefinitely. Now the Council's own grey belt assessment, as you mentioned earlier, has identified additional land across Buckinghamshire to be exposed to grey belt classification if that change presses forward. So I've got three questions which are linked to one another. First question is, now that the Council knows which specific parcels of Buckinghamshire's green belt would lose their footnote 7 protection, what is our strategy for protecting that land, and has it made formal representations to the government opposing that removal? Secondly, is can the Council confirm, either today or in writing to this committee, how many hectares of our green belt would be removed, would be moved from protected to potentially grey belt if footnote 7 was removed, and how many dwellings could those land be, in theory, be accommodated under the golden rules? And the last question, now the government argues that the residue NPPF protections, such as the National Landscape Policy and the major development test, provides adequate protection. Has the Council obtained, again, independent legal advice on whether that is actually the case? because once a site has been classified as grey belt, my understanding, it's subject to a presumption that's in favour of development under the golden rules, and that is materially a weaker position than the outright exclusion from grey belt status. Thank you.

If I may, Chair, so perhaps just try to take some of those in order.