The scale of local opposition to big London schemes like Paddington, Elephant and Castle and Liverpool Street make me think. I believe it is thousands in each case? Can we learn by doing some research into the reasons for these objections? And having done so, tailor future planning policies? It might help stop the rot: the growing distrust in the planning system. For example, objectors driven by pure NIMBY views need long term familiarisation to accept the prospect of local change. So their opposition will be eased, if not fully removed by reducing future spatial uncertainties. As I have said here before this needs generational policy lead times. But objectors have other, sometimes entirely legitimate reasons for objecting to local land use change. Another example is opposition from people who love and want to preserve art deco buildings. Personally I dislike the style but many, or perhaps simply a vocal few, seem to care passionately. This sort of objection is different to nimby fears. One more group is objectors who cite local history or literary associations as reasons to oppose change. Who am I to say they are wrong? Each is unique.
It is time to learn from this source. Widespread objection is policy failure. If it is based on ignorance this omission must be remedied. As I say, it might need a generation to do so. If it is based on other, harder fears which carry some objective merit, the policy response will need a different approach. We need to start learning from failure at strategy policy level
Ian Campbell
11 March 2026
