<b>To avoid a system of planning obligations that may be even worse than the current free-for-all, the industry must come up with a workable solution...fast, argues John Stewart</b><br><b>One of the hard lessons of growing up is realising that sometimes serious problems have no solution. We just have to pick the least bad option and live with the consequences.</b><br> Planning obligations present just such a problem for the housebuilding industry and the government. After years of debate the industry has been unable to reach a consensus. Every proposal has its flaws, and therefore its opponents.<p></p><p><b><b>touting tariffs</b></b><br>Faced with mounting industry criticism of the delays, uncertainty and lack of transparency of the current system based on site-specific negotiations, the government proposed locally-determined tariffs. The reward for its pains was to be condemned from all sides. A few housebuilders supported the tariff, but generally the industry was opposed.</p><p> The most obvious drawback is that because every site is different, in most cases the tariff would serve only as a starting point. Housebuilders risked ending up with a tariff plus the current unsatisfactory system.</p><p> Although it has backtracked on the idea of a tariff, the government is committed to changing the current system and is …