SSDC LOCAL PLAN 2006-2028 – INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION

A RESPONSE TO HARDISTY JONES ASSOCIATES – THE IMPLICATIONS OF MATCHING LABOUR DEMAND AND SUPPLY ON FUTURE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS IN SOUTH SOMERSET

STATEMENT BY BARRIE HARTLEY – ID REFERENCE 4122433

The submitted Proposed South Somerset Local Plan makes provision for 15,950 additional dwellings over the plan period 2006-2028. The level of provision is based on demographic and economic scenarios which have been developed against 2011 census and interim 2011 sub national population projections. In economic terms the projections are based on two employment growth scenarios developed by Baker Associates; high e.g. (strong private sector led growth) and low: (slow, faltering recovery with the potential of a double dip recession). These two scenarios were subsequently replaced in October 2012 by a third mid-point scenario developed following submissions made by HJA regarding the percentage of self-employed in the district and South Somerset District Council’s interpretation of BRES and APS data regarding new job creations during the period 2010-2011.

I consider the Council’s methodology used to interpret the data is flawed and this feeds into an inaccurate assessment of future projections of employed workforce indicated in the HJA report.

A failure to correctly use data makes for inaccurate future projections and the potential for the over provision of housing supply against projected future population and realistic economic demand. This does not just affect the number of dwellings required but also on the significant future capital cost in supporting infrastructure.

HJA refers to the reports in LDF Project Management Board Workshops and support these as authoritative evidence along with their own submission regarding self-employment based on an average over time. I have concerns regarding SSDC methodology and evidence presented to the LDF PMB. These concerns are articulated in my other submissions.

In assessing future jobs growth as explained earlier I take the view that it is important to ensure the data is correctly used and analysed and latest evidence is taken fully into account. In the HJA report paragraph 1.5 (Changes to Household Size) they suggest the Interim 2011-based household projections released by CLG should be treated with some caution in line with the Council’s approach. The HJA report was prepared between 9th and 22nd April following the release of the 2011 Interim Household Projections. I have concerns that HJA suggest they knew what the council’s approach to the latest Household Projections was before the council published their response to the Inspector’s question on the subject. The HJA report could have influenced the Council’s considerations on the 2011 Household Projections on which the Planning Inspector had sought their views. Government guidance is that the Planning Inspector should place significant weight on the latest CLG Household Projections when considering if a Local Plan is sound.

As the latest household projections are the most authoritative and replace the 2008 household projections the HJA approach to projecting out to 2028 based on the earlier 2008 projections is considered most unwise.

Notwithstanding the above it is considered that the HJA report is an untested hypothesis. As HJA accepted the 2010 sub national population projections, the 2011 census and the 2011 interim population projections there is a high degree of inconsistency to then ignore CLG Interim 2011 Household Projections. Proper analysis comparing all scenarios including the CLG 2011 Interim Housing projections to indicate the impact of the HJA hypothesis on each household scenario, rather than dismissing the latest evidence.

Working Futures 2010-2020 report by Commission for Education and Skills[1] – This report is extensive and is offered to illustrate the potential dynamics of future employment at national and regional level. It covers potential future growth scenarios and occupations where growth will be strongest and weakest. Additionally it covers issues for example of the higher levels of part time work and increase of female workers in the economy; although female workers were mentioned in the HJA report the reference is light and with little substance. Future housing requirements are not necessarily derived in the way HJA implies in their report. As the women’s share of total employment rises along with the increasing retirement age it could well mean a greater proportion of the new jobs would be filled from within the resident population.

One of the regions with the projected lowest percentage of full time workers by 2020 is the south west region. It is reasonable to consider the proportion of part-time worker as logically they come from the resident population; it would be unusual to re-locate for part-time work. The Commission’s report shows in 1990 23.4% nationally were part-time increasing to 27.9% by 2010 and projected to rise to 29.3% in 2020. South Somerset already has a higher proportion than nationally.

The commission’s report indicates that nationally self-employed is projected to fall to 2020 but recognises the highest levels of self-employed are in rural areas and unlikely to change.

My considered view is that this late un-solicited HJA hypothesis has not been tested or made proper analysis of the evidence and as it was produced over a very short period, immediately post the publication of the CLG 2011 Interim Household Projections, it should be considered in that light with no weight being applied to it.

1

[1] Commission for Education and Skills – Working Futures 2010-2020