Somerset Council faces a critical balancing act between securing funding for GP surgeries and maintaining the viability of affordable housing projects, councillor Sarah Wakefield has cautioned.
When new housing developments are approved, the council negotiates Section 106 agreements with developers to secure financial contributions toward local services, including the construction or expansion of GP surgeries. NHS Somerset uses a formula considering surgery capacity and anticipated patient increase to determine these contributions.
Liz Browne of Bridgwater Without Parish Council criticized recent agreements, alleging that Somerset Council and NHS Somerset have allowed developers to minimize their financial commitments citing viability concerns.
READ MORE: Somerset Council Deputy Leader Cleared of Conflict of Interest in Life Factory Project
However, Councillor Wakefield, who oversees adult services, housing, and homelessness, contends that pushing for higher health funding risks undermining the delivery of much-needed affordable homes. Representing the Blackdown and Neroche division, she highlighted the difficulty in balancing demands: “The more claims you make on the developer, the less affordable homes you are going to get. We need to be a bit careful how we do this.”
She explained that excessive demands on developers often lead them to cut back or eliminate affordable housing contributions, jeopardizing housing goals across Somerset and nationally. While acknowledging the need for more GPs in growing communities, she urged a measured approach to funding requests.
Planning officer Andre Sestini noted that decisions about Section 106 contributions rest with the council and that only in rare cases is no contribution justified due to sufficient existing demand.
Councillor Mike Rigby, responsible for economic development and planning, recognized GP funding as a key public concern. He proposed clearer communication about how needs are calculated and funds allocated to better inform residents, many of whom struggle to secure GP appointments despite new housing developments.
It’s important to note that NHS contributions from developers currently fund capital projects—such as new or expanded surgery facilities—but not ongoing operational costs like paying medical staff.
Councillor Helen Kay of Frome East illustrated this challenge: her local surgery has capacity for thousands more patients but lacks funds to recruit additional doctors. She questioned whether alternative funding mechanisms like the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), which pools resources from multiple developments and can be spent more flexibly, could alleviate such pressure.
Kate Murdoch, Somerset Council’s planning policy service manager, clarified that while CIL funds can be used for infrastructure expansion, operational NHS staffing costs must be covered separately by the NHS. Alison Blom-Cooper, chief planning officer, summarized the dilemma succinctly: “There’s only one cake, and how you slice it up doesn’t really depend on whether the funding is from Section 106 or CIL.”
As Somerset continues to grow, finding the right balance between funding local health infrastructure and delivering affordable housing will remain a complex but essential task for the council.