This proposed modification assumes that it is necessary for the level of housing which is to be provided to be constrained in some way if the level of jobs which are created within the plan period is below the level the Council would wish to see. However, as we have previously explained in our evidence, and comments at the Examination hearings, this assumption is flawed.

The provision of housing actually helps to stimulate the economy, and housing is clearly identified as an economic driver throughout the NPPF. A greater level of housing provides accommodation for a resident work force, reducing prices, providing affordable housing, and generally making it possible for people to live close to where they work. Without new housing, local employers are more likely to relocate away from an area, as they find it more difficult to recruit staff, particularly those who are paid less.

Housing itself also helps to stimulate the creation of new jobs through the construction industry, and the secondary generation of employment through related industries.

There is no evidence which suggests that it is necessary to limit the amount of housing in order to allow the number of jobs in the area to "catch up" in some way. Neither is there any evidence which suggests that constraining the amount of housing will in some way help to stimulate the provision of new jobs, and the available evidence actually suggests quite the opposite. To restrict the level of housing based on these spurious grounds would be contrary to paragraph 47 of the NPPF. This proposed modification should therefore be deleted.