II. Greater clarity of language in relation to the difference between ‘Green-belt’, ‘green space’ ‘brownfield’ and other interchangeable terms could further aid public confidence in the process and understanding of its potential impacts. See 3.2 (II).

III. Whereas levels of publicity in relation to the public consultation must be maintained into the second phase, improvements to the consultation website portal could promote higher participation levels, through making this more intuitive and user friendly.

3. THE RIGHT DEVELOPMENT IN THE RIGHT PLACES, FOR THE RIGHT REASONS

3.1. The need for confidence in the data.
Stockport Labour wants to see the GMSF plan go forward on the basis of confidence in the data. In particular, we would like to have greater confidence in the assessment of future housing need. Our concern is that the process goes forward upon a solid base of evidence on future housing needs, rather than reflective of what is favourable to housing developers. Further development of the evidence base should lead us to provide the right housing in the right places, for the right reasons.

3.2. The balance between infrastructure, demand and evidence
This follows through to a lack of confidence that there has been enough work to identify the infrastructural burdens brought on by additional housing. The next phase of consultation should place more emphasis on demonstrating that the provision for additional transport infrastructure equates to the additional population burden in areas which are to be developed, both in terms of public and private transport.

We are further concerned that the provision of social infrastructure in the plan matches the additional demands of the growing population. Schools, doctors and other public goods are in some areas of Stockport already at capacity, and we would like to see greater weight given to the need for supply to match demand in future iterations of the report. Again, greater confidence in the evidence base would be of benefit to this area.