Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Jenrick fast-tracked Westferry decision to save Desmond £45m

Robert Jenrick
  • 6 Comments

Housing secretary Robert Jenrick was ‘insistent’ on pushing through the 1,500-home Westferry Printworks scheme, saving its backer Conservative party donor Richard Desmond £45 million, documents reveal

Jenrick previously denied there was any ‘actual bias’ behind his contentious approval for PLP’s £1 billion east London scheme, against the planning inspector’s advice. His unexpected decision came just 24 hours before Labour-held Tower Hamlets Council increased its community infrastructure levy rates on 15 January.

It has since emerged that Jenrick had sat next to developer and media magnate Desmond at a Conservative party fundraising dinner in November; that Desmond had brought up his development company Northern & Shell’s Westferry Printworks scheme at the dinner; and that Desmond had gifted the party £12,000 just two weeks after Jenrick’s approval.

But the documents released by the MHCLG, following an opposition day debate on the minister’s highly controversial decision, show Jenrick made a concerted effort to rule on the application before the January 15 deadline. The newly published correspondence also include a series of text messages which mention arrangements for a possible visit to the site.

Two days after the November dinner, Desmond texted Jenrick saying: ‘Good news finally the inspectors reports have gone to you today, we appreciate the speed as we don’t want to give Marxists loads of doe [sic] for nothing!’

On the same day an aide to Jenrick sent a message to an official at MHCLG saying: ‘SoS [secretary of state] has flagged a case in Westferry London Docklands (redevelopment of a printworks or something like that?).

‘He understands a ministerial decision is likely to be coming up on this soon and also there may be some sensitivity with timing of final decision. Given this he has asked that advice be prepared for the first few days of the new Gov.’

A text from Desmond to Jenrick on 23 December makes clear: ‘We have to get the approval before January 15 otherwise [I will have to make a] payment of £45 million to Tower Hamlets.’ 

Another email sent by an official at MHCLG on the week of the planning decision said: ‘On timing, my understanding is that SoS is/was insistent that decision issued this week ie tomorrow – as next week the viability of the scheme is impacted by a change in the London CIL regime.’

Government planning rules explain that the housing secretary has a quasi-judicial role, which means he ‘should act and be seen to act fairly and even-handedly’ to all parties involved in a planning dispute.

That means ministers should avoid meetings with applicants and, where that is impossible, should ‘not discuss the particular planning case’.

The guidance makes clear: ‘Privately made representations should not be entertained unless other parties have been given the chance to consider them and comment.’

Elsewhere in the tranche of documents published last night (24 June), an official communication reveals that the internal planning teams at MHCLG were in favour of dismissing the application but were overruled by Jenrick.

In another internal email, an official complains that ‘we have tried as best as possible to reflect his reasons [for approval] in the DL. It is not the case that the SoS subjective decision cannot be challenged at all.’

It goes on: ‘We have to provide [REDACTED] reasoning in the DL as to justify why the SoS is going against the recc of inspector and officials. That is what we have tried to do.’

Last month the government admitted Jenrick’s approval was ‘unlawful by reason of apparent bias’ and the housing secretary’s planning permission was subsequently quashed.

Tower Hamlets had previously asked the High Court to order the government to disclose documents that it said would show Jenrick was influenced by a desire to help the developer save millions of pounds.

According to the council: ‘Faced with the prospect of having to release documentation relating to the decision, the secretary of state chose to allow the planning permission to be quashed.’

However, all those documents appear now to have been released and pressure is now mounting on Jenrick to resign.

A spokesperson for MHCLG said: ‘The Secretary of State has been clear that he took his decision in line with his long stated views that we face a generational challenge to build the homes of all types the country needs.’

‘The timing and effect of a pending new Community Infrastructure Levy tariff is a valid material consideration, as it may have effect on the viability of a development and the likelihood that it will be built out in good time, and the published documents show this was a considered decision taken on its merits and with an open mind.’

But John Biggs, mayor of Tower Hamlets, said: ‘The revelations about the Westferry Printworks decision have blown apart confidence in our planning system under Mr Jenrick. The documents he was forced to release are damning and it looks like he rushed through the decision to help save the developer money and short-change my residents.’

He added: ‘The Minister referred to our borough as “rotten” and messages from the developer called our council “Marxist”. This name calling says more about them and their disregard for my residents whose borough it is, and who rightly want much needed affordable homes and money for local services.’

 

  • 6 Comments

Readers' comments (6)

  • Tom Butler-Weeks

    What a scandal. Which ever way you vote, this man does not have the interests of people at his heart. He has also single handedly undermined Tower Hamlets authority over planning matters. I'm sure the only stakeholders Desmond had in mind were his own.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • No sign whatsoever that Jenrick is aware that he's infected with the Cronyvirus.
    His performance in the House of Commons yesterday suggests that perhaps he thinks that he can bluff it out - Boris-style - but If he succeeds it'll be a big win for the virus (and probably bad news for the health of Victoria Tower Gardens, and of goodness knows what else in the future)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Industry Professional

    It's also interesting to note that the proposals exceed the limitations on travel distances required in the common areas of blocks of flats, as noted in Building Regulations Approved Document B1 (Fire Safety).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Utterly disgusting behaviour proving once again that those currently in power seek nothing but to line the pockets of their business acquaintances at the expense of the people. The man should resign immediately.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Gordon  Gibb

    Jenrick is in charge of the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government. That is the body to which the Architect's Registration Board is responsible, for the delivery of regulation of the architectural profession.

    As we all know, architects must be professional, impartial, competent and act with an appropriate standard of conduct. ARB must carry out its function and exhaust its duty to the consumer to deal with issues where architects have fallen short of that standard. And yet all of this is done in satisfaction of the imperative delivered and monitored by someone who has shown himself to be very far below any standard of honesty or integrity in the specific discharge of his duty in the context of architecture.

    As a result of that favouritism £45 million was lost to the tax payer, to the direct financial benefit of the party involved, because of a personal connection and a party-related financial one.

    In a world where there is no longer a need for Spitting Image, because it already exists on the News, this has to be the deepest and most heart rending of ironies.

    And yet Boris Johnson claims that the matter is over. Really? This man should go. The decision should be rescinded because it is corrupt, or through Judicial Review. If this administration cannot see the wrongdoing, this government is morally reprehensible and should fall. If not, why should anyone in this country believe in being honest, truthful or professional any more?

    Boris, this is far from over.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • For Gordon Gibb:
    It's surely no surprise that the Prime Minister shows no more enthusiasm for dispensing with Jenrick than with Cummings, they share the integrity deficit that's also apparent elsewhere in the government - and on the subject of the ARB, appointments to the Board are apparently in the gift of the Privy Council, headed by Jacob Rees-Mogg. What could possibly go wrong there?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.

Related Jobs

Discover architecture career opportunities. Search and apply online for your dream job.
Find out more