"So who are you talking about?" I asked, knowing that he was just dying to tell me.
"Three guesses?"
"Old Fox Lansley."
"Good try - but guess again."
"'Apple Schnapps' Shapps."
"Try again."
"Well - the Three Foolish Monkeys: 'Apple Schnapps', 'Bagpuss' Pickles and 'Mr Disgusted' Clark."
"Yep! But this time only two of the Foolish Monkeys get a bashing- the stooge - 'Mr Disgusted' Clark - our brilliant (I don't think) planning minister. And, of course, our pal Eric 'Bagpuss' Pickles. Between the two - they united them! Here," Arturo placed several cuttings in front of me, "take a gander - then write your blog." So saying, he yawned and walked away.
I looked at the cuttings. One was written in The Daily Telegraph on September 27 by Bill Cash, MP for Stone in Staffordshire. The article's title was 'Hands Off Our Land: Why do MPs remain silent over planning reforms?'. It cites the new planning reforms as being a veritable disaster for the country. He writes that:
"The planning framework was not even available for inspection until after the localism Bill had passed the House of Commons – Sir Humphrey would be proud, but many MPs feel justifiably aggrieved."
He goes on to comment:
"The Government insists that local communities will be able to protect themselves by adopting neighbourhood plans. Yet under the Localism Bill, these would have to operate within the constraints of a legal presumption in favour of development. A plan will only be accepted when it complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and with the local authority’s own plan (which must follow national guidance), and with our EU obligations, especially in terms of promoting renewable energy."
Bill Cash makes a passionate argument for MPs to be given time to scrutinise the new planning framework. He ends by stating:
"The Government must give councils breathing space to put new plans in place to avoid planning by appeal and a default “yes” to development. It must also table amendments in the Report stage, before the Localism Bill returns to the Commons for a final vote. The crunch is now, but it is still not too late."http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/hands-off-our-land/8791981/Hands-Off-Our-Land-Why-do-MPs-remain-silent-over-planning-reforms.html
So - I wondered what the other two cuttings held that could, in Arturo's words, unite The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian. The first was 'Our planning system is authorised blackmail – and it's about to get worse' by George Monbiot. It was in The Guardian on 26 September. There was a large photo of 'Mr Disgusted' Clark staring like a creature out of Orwell's '1984'. Monbiot begins the article like this:
"Every government needs an Eric Pickles: a human wrecking ball who will swing wherever he's told. Every
government needs a man or woman of crashing insensitivity, devoid of empathy or imagination, unaware of the value of what he or she has been instructed to demolish."
I cheered! Two of our Three Foolish Monkeys demolished
1. The demonic photo of 'Disgusting' Clark (I've decided the new moniker suits him better!!!)
2. The image of 'Bagpuss' PIckles as a 'human wrecking ball'. Of course, he does have the build for it! Know wha' I mean?
The article destroys the credibility of 'Bagpuss' Pickles as having any desire other than to construct a developers' charter. Monbiot gives examples from his own experience and cites other cases where large developers have ridden roughshod over the wishes of small local communities. The developers have the time, the patience, the incentives and - most important of all - the money to get what they want. George Monbiot ends his article in this way:
"The Wullies – build Whatever You Like, Wherever You Like – have their hand in the glove of government. They have portrayed this as a fight between green and brown, town and country, growth and stagnation. It's simpler than that. It's a fight between corporate power and democracy."http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/26/planning-system-authorised-blackmail
The third cutting was also from The Guardian on 28 Septemeber. It was written by Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green Party, under the title 'Planning reforms are bigger threat to our countryside than forest sell-off'. Her passion is evident. She writes:
"The proposed new planning framework now out to consultation is, if anything, a worse threat to our countryside, because "economic development" (read "developers' profits") will override environmental protection not just for our woods but for every field, hedgerow, marsh, heath and moor in England. These plans will also help accelerate the decline of inner cities and high streets by encouraging more urban sprawl. And they are a further attack on local democracy."
She makes three points indicating reasons for opposing the new planning framework:
1. It ignores the fact that undeveloped land is a finite resource
2. It has a presumption in favour of developers which is even stronger than under the current system
3 It makes development on greenfield sites easier and it will have a knock-on effect for inner cities. This will be made worse because the national target for redeveloping brownfield sites is to go.
She advocates that instead of pushing ahead with the new framework, "the government should introduce a Land Value Tax (or LVT) – a levy on the unimproved value of land." This would "encourage them to develop vacant and under-used land properly".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/28/planning-reforms-threat-to-countryside
So - Arturo was right! In a just cause - good people see through the spin to the crux of the matter and forget their usual prejudices. I say 'Hurrah for the united front presented by The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian in their endeavours to save the countryside and green spaces from the greedy claws of developers.
'Bye' from me.
No comments:
Post a Comment