I was very sorry to hear about the death of Peter Davies, the editor of Charney Chatter, among many other things. Peter and I spent a brilliant day together with RAF Benson, at his suggestion, so we could learn more about the work of the base, because of local concerns about helicopter flights over the village. My thoughts and prayers are with his family.
Planning issues are once again dominating my postbag, and therefore dominating my agenda. While they may not be relevant to all my constituents, they are big issues in all the main towns and villages. Wallingford is concerned at plans to build 750 houses in the town. Not only is the number deemed too large (something like a 30 per cent increase in the town’s size) but there is also concern about the fact that the homes are to be built on one site. Similarly, In Wantage there is concern at plans for 1500 houses, on top of the 2500 planned for Grove. Again, a massive increase, and all in specific areas. Didcot is set to grow by about 5,000 houses. Faringdon has fewer concerns about housing – there the issue is a proposed new Tesco on the outskirts of the town, which could affect local businesses. And finally, the expansion of Swindon to the east remains a threat though this is receding. Add to this the on-going battle over an incinerator at Sutton Courtenay and the proposed reservoir at Steventon, and you can see there are a whole range of big planning issues affecting almost every community.
What do all these issues have in common? First, although there is consultation, local people do not feel that they are really being consulted. Rather, they are being presented with options, none of which they really like, and asked to choose the least worst. Second, there is the feeling that these developments are being carried out by developers and companies that have no connection with the local area, who hold the upper hand, who will build their houses and then disappear. Third, there is a feeling that these developements are taking place piecemeal. There is no real overarching discussion taking place about how the Vale and South Oxfordshire should grow. No one disputes that we need more houses, particularly for young people. But what about a discussion about where it should go? For example, if every village in the area took another five or ten houses, much of the housing need would be met, and those villages would benefit from having new people.
One of the arguments in favour of large-scale development is the so called 106 agreements, whereby developers pay for infrastructure improvements. Without large-scale development, it is argued, we wouldn’t get the infrastructure we need. This is easily solved by levying a tax on every new home built, and ring-fencing the proceeds for affordable housing and infrastructure improvements.
In March (probably by the time you have read this) I am holding a meeting with the distinguished architect Sir Terry Farrell, in Wallingford, to look at these kind of issues. Sir Terry is a master-planner, and has worked on a lot of projects in Kent, including the Thames Gateway. Sir Terry argues we no longer do planning in this country, only development control. We need to seize back power from developers and put it back into the power of the community.
In Parliament, I called a debate on the pernicious effects of the Criminal Records Bureau, and how it is affecting my constituents . The CRB takes so long to carry out checks that often people lose the jobs which they have been offered. Also, too many people are subject to multiple CRB checks which is time consuming and expensive. As usual, the debate and all my other parliamentary work can be read on my website at www.vaizey.com