If you sometimes wonder what part of the housing market is broken, stories in The Times today (14 November 2022) make plain the magnitude of the problem. Fresh swathes of the countryside must never be touched the advocates say. Given the rich literary heritage spread throughout England this contentious issue could be another green belt: a literary green belt. It has echoes of the opposition to dedicated signed footpaths in the Lake District. Enjoyment of the countryside comes second to preservation of the countryside. Ideal for those who already living in these protected areas.
In Hertfordshire, according to the The Times local residents, heritage bodies, an academic and an Oscar winning actress have raised concerns over hugely regrettable and inappropriate plans to build to build a car park and a toilet in the fields that inspired E.M.Foster’s magnificent 1910 novel Howards End;( one of my much loved English Literature ‘A’ texts more than sixty years ago), despite the revealing fact that Stevenage council want to turn the area into a country park. Why is this change so awful? CPRE says the proposal is an entirely inappropriate feature that will introduce alien features into this highly valued rural landscape. Historic England condemns the proposals because they encourage man-made features. Why are man-made features always bad? Look at the hill top villages of Tuscany. Without them Italy would not possess the highest number of UNESCO World Heritage sites throughout the world.
In Hampshire the same literary fears are cited by opponents of a plan to build 1200 new homes on unprotected white land near Jane Austen’s former home in Alton. Likewise council supported plans to build homes across the River Tweed from Abbotsford, the country house created by Sir Walter Scott have run into opposition. And Julian Fellowes who wrote the Downton AbbeyTV series was part of a campaign to block a housing estate near a manor that inspired Thomas Hardy’s novel The Mayor of Casterbridge in 2018.
One of The Times leading articles today quickly spots the easy option, saying land that inspired Howards End should not be turned into a country park. It’s obvious after all, look at the weighty opposition. Emma Thompson, Oscar winning actress in a screen version of Howards End; Professor Michael Proctor, provost of King’s College, Cambridge and home of many Foster paper; Lord Fellowes and the Council for the Protection of Rural England. Easy-peasy-England’s green and pleasant land-quintessential old England: we all agree; it must not change. For 5o years we have known this truth. These totems are what makes England special. And now, two generations later, as a result we have a housing crisis. House prices and rents are at levels which condemn new generations to third world homes for them and their new families. This is policy failure on a grand scale. Failure which is easily understood, built on deeply rooted cultural and widespread support.
The cultural opposition to change; the local environmental conservation led opposition to change; the climate warming fears which fuel opposition to building: these are powerful forces opposing any new building anywhere. What an alliance they make. And yet. And yet. We need the homes in the open countryside. Brown field development is a myth. Little of it is where people want to live. Increasing urban densities is another myth: local urban residents hate it. And yet. And yet! Where will the homes go? Or shall we, the boomers cash in our chips and simply walk away?
Few boomers, if they pause and think will do this: it is callous, brutal and immoral. But few boomers make the connections. Why is always saying no not sustainable? Why is an ageing population relevant? Why are the rising expectations of the next generations a factor? What do you mean; excessive housing debt is drowning the prospects of our kids? Explain why a radical change in housing policy is overdue. Local communities must take responsibility for their communities futures, ah, yes. Why is opting out a no, no.
And if local councils fail to deliver? What then? This is the crunch point. Who has ultimate responsibility? And how do they enforce it?
Ian Campbell
14 November 2022
