While you have to accept that the majority of people in the UK live in towns and that most central policies are town based one cannot escape the impression that our current government oscillates between bemusement and active hostility in its approach to the rural population.
The bemusement can be summed up by an article Melissa Kite in the Daily Telegraph that comments that a government minister recently telephoned her for advice on horses. Something equine had been included in his brief and she was the only person who he know who owned a horse or had even ridden one.
The hostility became evident during the row over hunting with hounds during which a number of senior politicians gave the impression that they believed that the countryside was entirely populated by jackbooted aristos who divided their time between flogging the peasantry and disemboweling small animals.
They now seem to have decided to concrete over as much of the undeveloped part of the country as possible. Probably hoping to remove the problem for ever or simply as revenge for the miners’ strike. (I have always failed to follow the logic on that particular connection as the Thatcher government was, in many ways, just as urban based as this one. However, that’s another issue).
A lack of understanding of country life has to be part of the problem. For example, look at the background of Caroline Flint the current housing minister. Elected in 1997 and one of Blair’s Babes she rose on the coat-tails of the Orange One (Peter Hain). Following the Hain implosion she is out there on her own.
We learn that she has a strongly political background having worked for local government in Lambeth and as a union official for the GMB. In other words, never had a proper job. She sits for a mining constituency. Not much experience of rural life there.
In an attempt the educate Caroline the Council for the Preservation of Rural England has an e-petition about the 3 million new houses that the government is planning to build. (They are against it). If you would like to add your signature you can do so via their website at www.cpre.org.uk
Wednesday, 14 May 2008
Thursday, 8 May 2008
It's that man again
A headline in the Salisbury Journal reads ‘Council decision is a victory for democracy’. There is certainly great relief that the council has agreed to review and significantly change the plans to build 12,500 new houses in the area by 2026. However, nice though that is, I don’t think that we can afford to be complacent.
On the opposite page in The Journal is a letter from Julian Johnson (The Crusader’s Councillor for April 2008). Oh dear, why does that man irritate me so much? I must try to be more tolerant, actually he is only telling the truth.
Julian is responding to a letter published in a previous edition of The Journal which seems to have implied that the South West Regional Assembly (SWRA), on which Julian sits, is part of an evil EU conspiracy to subvert British democracy. Julian says that the SWRA does not receive EU funding and that 70% of the members are elected – as indeed they are but to County Councils and local authorities, not to the SWRA. The other 30% of members are appointed and are the great a good, or at any rate the available and compliant, representing one would guess special interest groups.
If you look at SWRA’s website they also make a big point of stating that they are not funded or directed by the EU. So presumably this is a charge that is made quite often which, of course, doesn’t make it true.
In two years all the regional assemblies will be abolished and their planning powers passed to the Regional Development Agencies.
Which leaves us where exactly? For a start awed by the amount of money that appears to be sloshing around, over £4.5 million for 2007/08, to support an organisation that meets three times a year, but I suppose they have lots of groups and sub-committees that discuss things and generally have nice thoughts.
The Crusader is most concerned that this whole vast edifice is really just a huge, expensive rubber stamp.
Julian states correctly that SWRA’s planning body originally came up with a figure of 9,200 houses for Salisbury District but that this figure was increased by 35% to 12,400 by an independent panel of planning inspectors appointed by the government.
So the SWRA, Wiltshire County Council and Salisbury District Council all just meekly accepted that they had to do as they were told, despite the fact that local consultation and experience had suggested that a much smaller number of houses would be appropriate.
I can understand civil servants obeying orders but our elected representatives? Surely they should have some backbone if they really think that something is wrong? Or am I being idealistic?
On the opposite page in The Journal is a letter from Julian Johnson (The Crusader’s Councillor for April 2008). Oh dear, why does that man irritate me so much? I must try to be more tolerant, actually he is only telling the truth.
Julian is responding to a letter published in a previous edition of The Journal which seems to have implied that the South West Regional Assembly (SWRA), on which Julian sits, is part of an evil EU conspiracy to subvert British democracy. Julian says that the SWRA does not receive EU funding and that 70% of the members are elected – as indeed they are but to County Councils and local authorities, not to the SWRA. The other 30% of members are appointed and are the great a good, or at any rate the available and compliant, representing one would guess special interest groups.
If you look at SWRA’s website they also make a big point of stating that they are not funded or directed by the EU. So presumably this is a charge that is made quite often which, of course, doesn’t make it true.
In two years all the regional assemblies will be abolished and their planning powers passed to the Regional Development Agencies.
Which leaves us where exactly? For a start awed by the amount of money that appears to be sloshing around, over £4.5 million for 2007/08, to support an organisation that meets three times a year, but I suppose they have lots of groups and sub-committees that discuss things and generally have nice thoughts.
The Crusader is most concerned that this whole vast edifice is really just a huge, expensive rubber stamp.
Julian states correctly that SWRA’s planning body originally came up with a figure of 9,200 houses for Salisbury District but that this figure was increased by 35% to 12,400 by an independent panel of planning inspectors appointed by the government.
So the SWRA, Wiltshire County Council and Salisbury District Council all just meekly accepted that they had to do as they were told, despite the fact that local consultation and experience had suggested that a much smaller number of houses would be appropriate.
I can understand civil servants obeying orders but our elected representatives? Surely they should have some backbone if they really think that something is wrong? Or am I being idealistic?
Wednesday, 7 May 2008
The only way to start the day?
One of the Crusader’s readers (a small but dedicated band) suggested that, as protest blogs can be a bit boring, I should break things up a bit with romantic descriptions of the beauty and tranquillity of rural life. You can tell that he only gets down here at weekends.
While vehemently denying that The Crusader is boring I thought I might offer a glimpse of country life.
Exiting briskly from the house at 6.30am this morning en route for Salisbury station I was surprised (a mild description of my reaction) to find a large rat expiring just outside the kitchen door. As it was not quite dead, but clearly unwell, it had to be dispatched with a spade before I started my journey.
The roads in and out of Salisbury are pretty busy at 6.35am and I wondered how many of my fellow motorists had started their day by squashing a rat. From their driving possibly quite a few.
It would be idle to deny that the village has a rat problem but so do most places in the UK. Isn’t it strange that even the most devoted animal lover can become quite enthusiastic about cruelty when confronted by a rat infestation? My murderous moment made me wonder how that arch defender of animal rights and vegetarian supremo Sir Paul deals with the rats on his estate in Sussex. Perhaps pop stars have a special entourage member for rat control or alternatively he may imagine that the rodents are all called Heather and do it himself!
While vehemently denying that The Crusader is boring I thought I might offer a glimpse of country life.
Exiting briskly from the house at 6.30am this morning en route for Salisbury station I was surprised (a mild description of my reaction) to find a large rat expiring just outside the kitchen door. As it was not quite dead, but clearly unwell, it had to be dispatched with a spade before I started my journey.
The roads in and out of Salisbury are pretty busy at 6.35am and I wondered how many of my fellow motorists had started their day by squashing a rat. From their driving possibly quite a few.
It would be idle to deny that the village has a rat problem but so do most places in the UK. Isn’t it strange that even the most devoted animal lover can become quite enthusiastic about cruelty when confronted by a rat infestation? My murderous moment made me wonder how that arch defender of animal rights and vegetarian supremo Sir Paul deals with the rats on his estate in Sussex. Perhaps pop stars have a special entourage member for rat control or alternatively he may imagine that the rodents are all called Heather and do it himself!
Monday, 5 May 2008
Fighting back
An interesting article in The Observer newspaper on how local communities can campaign against planning decisions. It starts with a row about the relocation of some Victorian lampposts in Ealing and goes on to give some helpful hints about ways to get the attention of your local council.
An argument about lampposts can seem trivial but it illustrates the growing gap between the government’s mantra about listening to local communities and the sad reality.
The campaigning tips can be summarised as follows:
If you want to protect your community, early intervention in the planning process is essential.
Planning law only gives 21 days for protest, so get everyone to look out for planning applications. The minimum requirement is a notice on the buildings that are next door or one one side, so good local communication is essential.
To fight an application, know your rights and get access to information.
You can make your point at local council meetings, but you need to check your speaking rights, which vary from council to council.
As a rough guide a petition with 25 signatures will get you a five minute slot at a council meeting - and five slots could be enough to make your case.
For more information see:
www.elflaw.org
www.planningaid.rtpi.org.uk
www.tescoploy.org
Friday, 2 May 2008
London is different
How many new houses do we need to build in Salisbury? For that matter, how many do we need in the South West?
There is an interesting report by the BBC on the differences between London and the rest of the UK.
http://www.20plus30.com/blog/2008/04/london-and-england-have-little-in.html
Extracting a few facts and figures, over half the country’s population growth is in London where 40% of the population are foreign born as opposed to 7% in the rest of the UK.
In London one person in 10 is a pensioner, in the rest of the UK one in five.
Last year the economy in London grew at 3.5% while the rest of the UK showed 2.7% growth.
We are assured that the housing needs of Salisbury have been based on figures drawn up by the Office of National Statistics. Given that their estimates of growth are correct – and they were prepared by the government that originally estimated the cost of the London Olympics at £2.4 billion and are now facing a bill of £9.3 billion – then surely the real area that needs new housing is London.
Spreading new houses round the county may seem fair, but building lots of accommodation in places that people do not want to live and forcing more people to commute huge distances every day is going to create more problems than it solves.
There is an interesting report by the BBC on the differences between London and the rest of the UK.
http://www.20plus30.com/blog/2008/04/london-and-england-have-little-in.html
Extracting a few facts and figures, over half the country’s population growth is in London where 40% of the population are foreign born as opposed to 7% in the rest of the UK.
In London one person in 10 is a pensioner, in the rest of the UK one in five.
Last year the economy in London grew at 3.5% while the rest of the UK showed 2.7% growth.
We are assured that the housing needs of Salisbury have been based on figures drawn up by the Office of National Statistics. Given that their estimates of growth are correct – and they were prepared by the government that originally estimated the cost of the London Olympics at £2.4 billion and are now facing a bill of £9.3 billion – then surely the real area that needs new housing is London.
Spreading new houses round the county may seem fair, but building lots of accommodation in places that people do not want to live and forcing more people to commute huge distances every day is going to create more problems than it solves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)