House Building Policy - the view from the Basingstoke Lib Dems

For those who may have seen a recent Conservative "In Touch" campaign leaflet we would like to make it clear the Basingstoke Liberal Democrats have NEVER supported the Labour Government's building target for Basingstoke or Basingstoke and Deane.

When the matter was debated and voted on by Basingstoke and Deane Council, the Liberal Democrat Group voted for the lowest figure on offer, that was 740 or 14,800 over 20 years. (710 pa for the Basingstoke area 30 for the West of the Borough)

This was a recorded vote and the details are available in the Minutes of the Council Meeting 13/10/2005 on the Council website.

http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/council/councillors/councilmeetings?meetingid=454

The 740 figure was subsequently increased by both the Conservative controlled County Council and the Conservative controlled regional body before the Government set an even higher figure.

The Liberal Democrats have been clear that they do not support the imposition of housing targets on local Councils.

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg says "Let's build our national housing target from local targets that reflect need on the ground. Bottom up. That means trusting people who know best rather than picking numbers out of the air

Lib Dem Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Julia Goldsworthy has said:

"The Government's centralist proposals override the needs of local people, but the Conservative approach is no better. Under their plans, council decisions on housing development would be driven by the prospect of cash bonuses. Both approaches spell disaster for communities, and would put local needs at the bottom of the priority list."

It is worth keeping in mind that the last time there was last a Conservative controlled Council and Government, from 1979-1995 the average number of new dwellings each year in Basingstoke and Deane was over 1000. In fact the average figure from 1961-2005 was 990 new dwellings per year. There was a slow down from 1995 -2005, but since the Conservative regained control of the Council, the number of new units has shot up to the 1,000 level.

The Liberal Democrats have been very clear that they do not support substantial development in the vicinity of Basing Ward on very strong environmental grounds.

When in joint-administration and drawing up the current Local Plan, we ruled it out.

The reality is that development to the East of Basingstoke it is only back on the Agenda because the Conservatives have been irresponsible on the issue of Manydown.

It is regrettable that the Conservatives have put short-term party political advantage over the long-term interests of the Borough.

Nationally, whilst campaigning against Labour's house building targets, the Conservatives have also lambasted Labour's failure to build enough houses and have pledged that the Conservatives will build more !

For example, in March 2006 David Cameron called for more house-building to provide an "adequate" number of homes in the UK, mocking opponents of new developments as "bananas" - people who want to 'Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone'.

The Conservatives recently launched their policy paper "Open Source Planning". This is being sold to residents as putting them in control, but to developers as something else. The Conservative national party website quotes Peter Redfern - Chief Executive, Taylor Wimpey in support of 'Open Source Planning'

"This is a truly radical approach to the planning system but it is a workable approach and one which will be a definite improvement on the current system."

Please be aware of Taylor Wimpey interest in "Basingstoke East"

http://www.loddonvillage.com/default.asp?PageID=1

At the Council, the Lib Dems group leader Cllr John Shaw has asked for the Conservatives to rule out development East of Basingstoke but have been rebuffed.

The Basingstoke Lib Dems believe that the current situation is highly dangerous. As others have pointed out, the choice in the SHLAA is no real choice at all. The Administration has muddled and delayed the process of producing a local development framework leaving a real risk that soon developers, not residents will end up dictating the location of development.