Rural Kent on the frontline of PM's battle to build

Sir Keir Starmer will later unveil sweeping changes to the planning system that could see councils forced to consider building on green belt land in England.

The prime minister has vowed to override "blockers" standing in the way of 1.5 million new homes he says are needed to solve the housing crisis.

But what happens when those "blockers" are elected councillors and local people with genuine concerns?

One rural corner of Kent is rapidly becoming a test case for how determined the government is to force through planning decisions in the teeth of local opposition.

If you have the stomach for it, you can climb the narrow crumbling stone spiral staircase to reach the roof of St Nicholas' Church in Rodmersham.

From the top of the Norman church you get a panoramic view of north Kent. Directly below there is an apple orchard, beyond that fields of arable farmland with the occasional house, and in the distance the town of Sittingbourne, silhouettes of Thames Estuary heavy industry visible against the sky.

This is the land where Quinn Estates developers want to build 8,400 homes, new schools and a new road.

"It's an absolutely colossal development, it will have a devastating impact on this area," says Monique Bonney.

She grew up in Rodmersham and after living and working across the world returned to the village. She got married in St Nicholas' Church and has been an independent councillor for the area for 18 years.

She is not just concerned about the size of the new development - Rodmersham is currently made up of 275 homes - but how much will be affordable.

Only 760 homes, she says - about 9% of the proposed development. The developers say the level of affordable housing will be decided at a future inquiry.

There is also the question of the infrastructure. Bonney says the area has the worst GP-to-patient ratio in the country.

New medical facilities are include in the development proposal, but Bonney is sceptical this will happen.

"I think my experience of 18 years of being an independent parish councillor and a district councillor has demonstrated that the system has utterly failed and government is absolutely incompetent for trying to deliver infrastructure services to local people."

Chris Mitchell, landlord of the local Fruiterers Arms pub, is similarly opposed: "It will no longer be a village, it will just be another part of a commute to London."

Bonney is not the only councillor opposing the proposals - the local Labour-led council was on the verge of voting to reject them.

But at the eleventh hour it was "called in" by Housing Secretary Angela Rayner. This means the government will take over the planning application rather than let the local authority decide.

"It seemed very undemocratic," said local Green Party councillor Rich Lehmann.

"They [councillors] should have been able to make their decision, even if it went to appeal after that decision was made."

Labour MP Kevin McKenna was one of around 70 others who asked Rayner to intervene in the decision.

He said: "I definitely wanted it called in. This [decision] has been running round the houses. I wanted it properly assessed."

"Both the major parties pledged to cut through these blockages to building, and Labour made it really clear we were going to look at planning from the get-go."

This is the kind of battle the Labour government faces if it wants to meet the target it has set itself.

After a two-month consultation, ministers will set out the final version of changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The government says it will:

• Give councils mandatory targets to deliver 370,000 homes a year in England
• Prioritise brownfield sites – disused areas that have been developed in the past – for new buildings
• Provide £100m for councils and 300 additional planning officers to speed up the planning process
• Order councils to identify lower quality green belt land – or "grey belt" land which could be built on.

The housing secretary said the government would "deliver the housing and infrastructure in a more co-ordinated way".

"In the past we haven't seen that. We've seen years of dither and delay, legal challenges."

Adam Hug from the Local Government Association said: "People cannot and do not live in planning permissions".

He said local authorities should be given greater powers to force developers to build once they had secured planning permissions, rather than sitting on the land.

Shadow housing secretary Kevin Hollinrake said: "Labour will bulldoze through the concerns of local communities."

During the consultation phase, local councils told the government its housebuilding plan was "unrealistic" and "impossible to achieve".

Not all locals in and around Rodmersham are opposed to the development.

Sittingbourne Football Club are flying high at the moment - second in the South East Division of the Isthmian league and on an FA trophy run.

"We're four games away from Wembley. Four," said club chairman Maurice Dunk.

The club is sponsored by Quinn Estates and would get a new stadium if the plans go ahead.

Dunk thinks the development is exactly what the area needs.

"The town is in a bit of a state. We need the roads. Between Sittingbourne and Sheppey there's over 100,000 people trying to use one motorway junction.

"I appreciate the local people don't want the houses, nobody does, but the business community definitely wants this to retain jobs in the area and hopefully expand jobs in the area."

He is also confident that the proposal will deliver "desperately needed" schools and GPs.

"We've got the worst doctor-to-patient ratio in the whole country."

He is happy the development proposal got called in: "I really don't want to be disrespectful to our local council, but it might be too big for them to decide on."