In my experience the answer is yes, as I discovered in Reading in 2014, when I published locally my idea, simply an essay for a competition prize, for a new city on white land between Reading and Basingstoke. The controlling Labour council for Reading Borough went bananas. Petitions, public meetings and protest letters to the judges. Facts had no impact. Instead local elections were paramount. The latest evidence of Labour suffering from the same local myopia is the decision by Labour controlled Bristol City Council to ignore the town’s housing need identified by the government’s standard housing method. Their excuse is that Bristol lack’s the land needed.
Which shows that local pressure to avoid change will always win, whichever political party is in power., Local priorities are short term, regardless of the long term needs locally ( affordability) and nationally (energy distribution and economic growth). We are back to the tipping point. When there is conflict between local and national need who has the final say? If it is the Westminster government, then all three national political parties in England need to agree a formula to stop themselves being held to ransom by local no change pressure groups. How are they to avoid accusations of riding rough shod over local, democratic fears? By working together on a national, two generations spatial plan. Unfortunately our confrontational Westminster style of governance makes cross-party co-operation very difficult to achieve. If Sir Keir Starmer wants to show a mature, and different attitude to domestic policy conflicts, Labour could be the trail blazer: take the initiative and put this radical proposal into Labour’s GE manifesto. It might have wider appeal than they expect.
Ian Campbell
6 November 2023
