HEN Webinar Recording: October – The new National Planning Policy Framework. Is England’s planning system finally ready to tackle health inequalities?
Health Equity Network Webinar Recording: October – The new National Planning Policy Framework. Is England’s planning system finally ready to tackle health inequalities?
This month’s webinar featured Michael Chang, Associate Town Planner and Healthy Planning Lead at NHS Property Services, and Dr David McAleavey, Creating Active and Healthy Places Lead at Public Health South Tees. They explored what England’s new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) means for health, and how devolution and emerging Spatial Development Strategies (SDS) could embed health at a strategic level.
Key findings and themes
Health in planning policy: a decade in the making.
Michael showed that the NPPF’s commitment to healthy communities has been in place since 2012, and the new framework builds on it rather than starting afresh. Its health requirements have been strengthened, not weakened. The message was to make full use of what is already in national policy.
What’s new.
The NPPF now separates plan-making policies from decision-making policies. A new policy directs decision-makers to give substantial weight to the public health benefits of development, which could be a useful hook for advocating for healthy places. The presumption against hot food takeaways near schools is retained, with a “reasonable” distance now defined as around 400 metres or a five-minute walk. One gap is that references to local health needs and health strategies now sit only in plan-making, so it is less clear how they feature in planning decisions.
A new tier of strategic planning.
David explained that Spatial Development Strategies, introduced through the Planning Act 2025, are the biggest change to strategic planning in over a decade. Alongside the 2026 Devolution Act, which places a health and health inequalities duty on strategic authorities, they offer a real opportunity to build health into decisions on growth and infrastructure.
“Have regard to”: weak on outcomes, stronger on process.
Both Acts use the duty to “have regard to” health, which means considering it genuinely but not necessarily prioritising it. David argued the real leverage is in process: health impacts need to be evidenced and weighed on the record, which makes a strong evidence base essential. He shared how Tees Valley is building one, and speakers pointed to London, Liverpool City Region, Greater Essex and Hertfordshire as places to learn from.
Why this matters
The policy only makes a difference if it is used. For Marmot Places and other members, there is an opportunity to demonstrate public health benefits in development proposals, review local plans against the new NPPF, and engage early and forcefully in the vision and evidence base of emerging SDS. As Michael put it, the NPPF is not the end of the journey but the beginning of what happens next.
The recording is available here.
Please access the slides below.