Planning inspectors will not change how they assess Greater Manchester’s controversial development masterplan, despite signs the government is set to scrap housing targets.

Places for Everyone – which includes plans to build 165,000 homes across Greater Manchester over the next 15 years –  is currently undergoing a public examination on behalf of the secretary of state.

Previously dubbed the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF), the strategy has been repeatedly revised following a huge backlash over loss of green belt land – and remains deeply contentious among some communities.

Green belt campaigners were heartened by housing secretary Michael Gove’s recent statement signalling he intended to make further changes to the planning system such as ‘advisory’, not mandatory, housing targets and more ‘community control’ over decisions.

But during an examination session on Tuesday, planning inspector Louise Gibbons said this would not impact how the plan was scrutinised for legal ‘soundness’.

“At this point in examining Places for Everyone we will continue to apply national policy as it currently stand,” she told the hearing.

Christopher Katkowski KC, representing Greater Manchester Combined Authority, said his understanding was that inspectors had ‘no option’ other than to continue to apply the current policy framework.

Addressing Ms Gibbons he said: “So, unless and until national policy is changed and we can study the detail of these changes – and most particularly understand the implications for a plan at a very advanced stage, that is, going through its examination hearing process –  until we have all that detail none of us can work on the basis of speculation.

“And legally, you are obliged to to apply the extant test of soundness as is set out in the current version of the framework.”

Jackie Copley, representing the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)  asked for the statement to be given ‘examination document’ status, noting the government’s ‘clear intention’ for more community control and focus on building on brownfield sites.

She added that recognition of housing targets as an ‘advisory starting point’, rather than mandatory was a crucial for the ‘progression’ of the Places for Everyone plan.

However Mr Katowski said the statement emphasised the current position – and councils had always been able to argue for building more or fewer homes on the grounds of exceptional circumstances.

“I do not accept for one moment that anything the Secretary of State has written is a statement of current government policy which affects the test of soundness,” he said.

“If, as and when national policy is changed we will all have to consider exactly what it says. As I have said in terms and will now repeat, critical to this is whatever provisions that are made for plans that are at a very advanced stage – Places for Everyone being an extremely good example because we are quite a way through the hearing process of examination.”