‘Door open’ for Stockport to rejoin GMSF

The council, which withdrew from the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework last year amid concerns over Green Belt release, is welcome to return to the fold but time is running out, said Manchester’s regeneration lead. 

“The door is still open to Stockport,” Cllr Angeliki Stogia, Manchester City Council’s executive member for environment, planning and transport, told a Place North West event on the future of the GMSF.

However, Cllr David Meller, Stockport Council’s cabinet member for regeneration – who had been supportive of the proposals laid out in the GMSF and said he did not want to withdraw – said deciding to return to the joint plan now could delay the already protracted process further. 

“If we come back in, it might hold things up and the last thing we would want to do is hold back the plan. The ticking clock and urgency could help formulate the plan,” he said. 

“The new ‘plan of nine’ [boroughs] is absolutely the right thing for Greater Manchester and I am glad it is happening. 

Stogia said Stockport’s decision to withdraw was motivated by “party politics” and was “slightly terrifying”. 

The council, which has no overall majority, opted out of the GMSF in December following a revolt by Conservative councillors who refused to back the latest draft of the framework that had the support of the other nine Greater Manchester boroughs. 

Bury, Bolton, Oldham, Manchester, Tameside, Wigan, Rochdale, Trafford, and Salford are now progressing the Places for Everyone plan, a revised version of the GMSF, and hope to launch it for public consultation before the end of the year.

The GMSF was designed to allocate land for housing and employment use across the 10 Greater Manchester authorities. 

However, having chosen to go it alone, Stockport must now create a local plan that proves it can still meet Government-set housing targets.

If it cannot, Stockport leaves itself open to the possibility of losing some of the Green Belt land that Tory councillors were fighting to project, Stogia said. 

The “colourful” political situation within the council made Stockport’s involvement in the GMSF more difficult, Meller added. Regardless of the political make-up of a local authority, matters pertaining to planning are always likely to stir up emotions. 

“Other councils in Greater Manchester are more unified but there is always the potential for conflict in planning,” he said.  

“I think the fact that the plan of nine has universal buy-in is vitally important. There may be bumps along the way but its ambition is exciting.”

Your Comments

Read our comments policy

Stockport will see challenges to their green belt if their not part of the GMSF. I foresee great pressure on Stockport unless they can demonstrate enough homes.


Fine. Leave them to it.

By Sceptic

A great ploy to waste even more time…..


Leave Stockport to suffer from their political decision. Would love to see the faces of some councillors when they see greenbelt land consistently built on as a result of their decisions. The whole Stockport Borough is going to suffer massively because of their GMSF decision

By Anon

Crazy decision for short term political gain will see Stockports green belt put at serious risk of over development. For the good of the Borough councillors need to reverse their decision but unfortunately their political self interest will prevent them from doing the right and sensible thing.

By Monty

Time for parts of South Manchester to rejoin Cheshire

By Anonymous

Stockport finding out what it feels like to have NIMBY Tory councillors running the show

By Anonymous

Everything must be done to protect the green Belt.
There are areas within Stockport that can be used for housing, without destroying our Green spaces There are too few which are easily accessible

By RD Bishop

Stuff GMFS keep green belt.

By V concar

Related Articles

Sign up to receive the Place Daily Briefing

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox


Join more than 13,000 property professionals and sign up to receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox.

By subscribing, you are agreeing to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

"*" indicates required fields

Your Job Field*
Other regional Publications - select below