Now the Borough Council Asks Government to Reconsider Grey Belt Rules

Published on: 5 Nov, 2026
Updated on: 5 Nov, 2026

Green belt or “grey belt”.

By James Moules local democracy reporter

and Martin Giles (interview filming by Tom Brown)

Guildford Borough Council is demanding the government reconsider its “grey belt” planning policy, amid fears it could open up vast swathes of the area’s green belt to development.

The council, which is due to be dissolved next April in favour of the new West Surrey unitary authority, has adopted a motion urging ministers to rethink changes to planning rules that were designed to ignite a new boom in housebuilding across Britain.

Grey belt was a concept introduced to national planning guidelines in 2024, which allowed for land that “does not strongly contribute” to the green belt to be freed from tighter restrictions on development.

Guildford’s “grey belt” according to the AECOM Study, commissioned bt GBC.

But analysis from Channel 4 News this summer found that as much as 96 percent of Guildford’s green belt could meet this definition – prompting fears from councillors and residents of a development “free-for-all” in the area.

Councillors now want a halt on grey belt rules until Guildford has had the chance to draw up its own Local Plan.

Introducing the motion, Cllr George Potter (Lib Dem, Burpham) said: “I’m sure none of us need it spelling out to us the government’s changes to the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) have had on our borough and our part of the world in recent years.”

An amendment to the motion by Cllr Catherine Young was welcomed and agreed. Hear her thoughts on the subject here…

The motion asked Guildford’s council leader to call on ministers to suspend grey belt rules for land separating villages and amend planning guidelines to protect these communities.

It also urged the council itself to “rapidly” work to develop its own Local Plan, a document that serves as the foundation for planning and development in a particular area.

Citing the 96 per cent figure, Potter told his fellow members that the government’s changes had altered Guildford’s green belt “at the stroke of a pen”

He said: “This motion is about sending a message as a council and calling on the government to reconsider their policy to suspend the grey belt rules until we have adopted a local plan.”

Additional housebuilding in the borough is “desperately needed”, Cllr Potter added, a comment which drew a called out remark of: “Well build some!” from Cllr Howard Smith (Lab, Westborough)

Undeterred Potter continued: “New development needs to be sustainable and to come with supporting infrastructure for both new and current residents.

“Opening up 96 per cent of the green belt to potential development in uncontrolled free-for-all fashion is the worst possible way to provide new housing.”

One of the Labour government’s central pledges upon returning to power in 2024 was to build 1.5 million new homes in England by the end of the parliament.

However, in a September BBC interview Housing Secretary Angela Rayner admitted there is only a “slim chance” this target will be met.

Cllr Potter’s motion was broadly well received by Guildford councillors, with many echoing sentiments that current grey belt definitions risked harming the character of many Surrey villages.

See also: Villagers Hear That the ‘Grey Belt’ Policy Should Be Suspended Until Reviewed

An amendment from Cllr Catherine Young (R4GV, Clandon & Horsley) was adopted that endorsed the use of the council’s urban capacity study in earmarking previously-developed brownfield sites in the early stages of the local plan process.

Guildford’s planning lead Cllr Fiona White (Lib Dem, Ash Wharf) said: “If identified brownfield sites are not enough, then we may need to look to the green belt – but that should be for us to decide on a properly planned basis.”

And Cllr Bilal Akhtar (Conservative: Worplesdon) noted the importance of this to the villages he represents both on Guildford and the incoming West Surrey councils.

“For these communities, this is not just about planning policy,” he said. “This is about identity, their character and their future.”

See Cllr Akhtar interviewed after the meeting…

Share This Post