As Reform UK gains traction in local elections and mainstream parties recalibrate to protect their voter base, developers must brace for heightened planning uncertainty.
With the quality of governance variable and policy coherence often lacking, the built environment is increasingly exposed to risk not from formal regulation, but from political volatility at the council level.
The Challenge: A New Layer of Planning Risk
In May 2025, Reform UK won 677 council seats and took control of several planning and highways authorities, including West Northamptonshire, Doncaster and Leicestershire. They now control seven county councils and three planning authorities. More than 60 planning authorities will hold all-out elections in the next cycle.
This might have gone unnoticed were it not for a broader political shift. As national parties adjust to populist voter sentiment, particularly on immigration and public order, mainstream councillors are mimicking the rhetoric. The result is a new and unpredictable operating environment for developers, where planning outcomes are increasingly shaped by short-term politics rather than long-term strategy, focused on improvements for local communities.
Polling from Lord Ashcroft shows immigration ranks as the top concern for 89% of Reform UK voters. That sentiment is being absorbed well beyond Reform-led authorities. In Denmark, the Social Democrats regained power by co-opting populist positions, an outcome that could be mirrored in the UK. But while national influence may ebb, the localised disruption is already embedded.
The Impact on Planning and Development
The implications for developers are immediate:
- Decision-making is inconsistent – Even within Reform-led authorities, councillors vary in competence, ideology, and experience.
- Planning pipelines face volatility – Without coherent party lines or local policy infrastructure, approvals may be delayed, reversed or politicised.
- Narrative framing is shifting – Terminology like “Net Zero” or “sustainable transport” may alienate councillors seeking to align with perceived voter scepticism.
Leicestershire provides an appropriate case study. Following a Reform UK takeover, the new administration was described by opposition leaders as lacking procedural clarity and avoiding scrutiny. Meanwhile, anecdotal reports suggest a more competent, delivery-oriented approach in West Northants. For developers, this variation makes it difficult to forecast outcomes or standardise engagement.
Further complicating matters, engagement professionals have reported a disconnect between Reform UK HQ and their councillors. While national figures present a pro-growth, pro-investment stance, local representatives are often anti-development. This dissonance presents a reputational risk for developers where national and local views differ.
Mitigating Risk: Five Strategic Adjustments
Developers can’t afford to wait for political normality to return. Instead, developers should build resilience into their planning and engagement strategies:
- Reassess Stakeholder Maps
Stop the assumption that party alignment means policy alignment. Treat each council as a unique actor. Identify the real decision-makers, whether they are elected or officer-level. - Reframe the Language of Development
Where ideological resistance to sustainability exists, use alternative framing:
– “Active travel” → “Safer school routes”
– “Low-carbon infrastructure” → “Lower bills and healthier streets”
- Prepare for Policy Drift
Build flexibility into project timelines and risk registers. Reform UK councils, and those influenced by their rhetoric, may pivot under pressure from local communities or National Leadership. Approvals may be revisited.
- Avoid Ideological Triggers
Lead with outcomes, not principles. Focus on economic benefits, local job creation, or improved infrastructure. Avoid moral or ideological appeals.
- Monitor Political Momentum
While Reform UK’s support may be eroded by mainstream party mimicry, it may take years. Projects being submitted now must account for at least one election cycle of populist turbulence.
Planning in a Politicised Landscape
The UK’s planning system has always been politicised. But today, politics is more volatile, less predictable, and increasingly performative. Developers must respond not only with strong schemes but also with robust strategies, narratives that are locally resonant, stakeholder maps that reflect today’s political actors, and delivery plans that are strong enough to withstand the next vote.
Political volatility is now a core planning and development risk. It’s time the sector treated it as such.