As MHCLG launches its national model design code and the accompanying guidance, it’s a relief to see that the obsession with “beauty” that began with the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission (BBBBC) seems to be waning. The words “beauty” and “beautiful” appeared more than 50 times in the 84-page white paper Planning for the Future (quite hard to plan for the past after all…), published last August. Contrast that with the new design code and guidance which only use these words six times, despite totalling nearly 150 pages.

So why the change of heart? Is it because the obsession with beauty feels a bit clumsy in light of the impacts of the pandemic – because the government has realised that it doesn’t know how to define or even recognise beauty and that is becoming a bit embarrassing – or because the latest documents have been produced and overseen by built environment professionals who recognise that because beauty is so subjective, it’s not a useful metric for policymaking?

One way or the other, I suspect ministers are starting to take the hint. Their latest initiative, the improbably named Office for Place, also suggests they might be ready for a new word, if not a new face. The office is being headed by Nicholas Boys Smith, who chaired the BBBBC following the death of Roger Scruton. Undoubtedly articulate and influential, but unfortunately not a qualified design professional.

…