Water shortages in Kent demonstrate why planning decisions are best made locally, not by central government diktat

We all take water for granted, at least we did until this winter. For many across West Kent, there was nothing coming out of the taps for days. Across Tonbridge, Edenbridge, the North Downs villages and beyond, problems with supplies have cut off homes not once but repeatedly over the years and it’s making life difficult for thousands of families. The government is making this much worse. Not only by failing to hold the management of South East Water to account, but also by increasing housing targets for our county.

In Tonbridge and Malling’s council area, those targets have risen by 34 percent. In neighbouring Sevenoaks, they are up by 63 percent. That’s more pressure on existing networks and pipes, reducing the water available for everyone. With creative definitions and easier planning reforms, including so-called “grey belt” developments, they’re making it harder for communities to make their own decisions about the growth that’s right for them.

All of this is connected. If the country is going to build the houses we need, then one key question needs to be answered: where will the water come from?

That’s why planning decisions are best made locally. Councillors understand their areas, their infrastructure, and their constraints. This government is going the other way by imposing top-down targets without considering whether the basic infrastructure exists to support them. West Kent shows the problem. Two councils are responsible for the communities I represent, and both are well run. Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council and Sevenoaks District Council do their best to bring forward Local Plans that balance growth with sustainability. But both have been blocked, not through any failure of their own, but because of constant changes to national planning policy.

Even more troubling is the role, or lack of it, played by water companies in the planning process. Although they’re statutory consultees for Local Plans, they don’t comment on individual planning applications. This is an extraordinary gap. It means that while high-level strategies may receive some, limited, input the cumulative impact of multiple developments on water supply is not properly assessed when it matters most. The consequences are clear in Sevenoaks, where engagement from water providers has been patchy at best. Out of four companies operating in the district, only two responded to requests for input, and even then with minimal detail. There is little evidence of robust modelling to align housing growth with water resource capacity.

In Tonbridge and Malling, the situation is worse. South East Water has stated unequivocally that it can supply water for just 6,318 additional homes between now and 2042, but the government’s housing target for the borough is 19,620 homes. Who will provide the water for 13,000 homes? That’s not speculation. The water company confirmed three critical points: it can’t meet the increased demand; the risk of outages will rise; and planned infrastructure upgrades will still fall short of what’s needed to meet government targets. Faced with this reality, what is a local authority supposed to do? Allocate sites for thousands of homes knowing the infrastructure does not exist? Approve developments that risk leaving future residents without reliable water? Unsurprisingly, the system is grinding to a halt, with planning decisions in Tonbridge and Malling already being affected. Applications are coming forward, but the councils can’t make a determination because the water supply cannot be guaranteed. That’s a freeze on development not by design, but by necessity. This situation helps no one. It doesn’t build homes or confidence, and it certainly doesn’t support the government’s ambition to increase housing supply.

The root of the problem is a failure to align housing policy with reality. Water Resource Management Plans are not being properly integrated into housing targets. In some cases, outdated assumptions based on projections from as far back as 2007 are still informing decisions today. This is not just a technical oversight; it is a fundamental flaw in the system. There are only two possible solutions. Either we dramatically increase water supplies, or we cut planned demand.

Infrastructure improvements are already planned with new pipelines, pumping stations, treatment upgrades and storage facilities all being mapped out. These are welcome, but they’re not enough. Even with all proposed schemes delivered, the gap remains. That leaves the only credible option: the government must urgently revisit and reduce housing targets in areas where water supply cannot support them.

Let’s be clear, we need new homes. Communities in West Kent recognise the need for growth and want places for their children to live. But development must be sustainable, deliverable, and above all connected to essential infrastructure.

Water isn’t optional and until that’s reflected in national policy, we risk building not just the wrong homes in the wrong places but stopping the homes we vitally need from being built at all.