First, political posturing in local planning stops civic thinking. Two, short-term local horizons stops civic policy making. Three, vociferous local residents selfish demands act like cuckoos-in-the nest: they chuck out fairness, balance and civic dignity.
There is a fine example going the rounds which vividly illustrates why our homes are twice the price they need be; our countryside has unloved estates haphazardly scattered; local spatial policies which will fall off the cliff edge in the 2030s (best ensure your kids are buying their first home by then); and national economic growth is of no concern to local leaders.
A county councillor for Theydon Bois has objected to plans for 150 homes on green belt land. Succinctly put, she says it is the wrong development in the wrong place. The site was assessed and rejected. It seems the ‘the Labour Government’s terrible planning policies, which put our Green Belt under attack …..’ cause her concern. Local might is right comes to mind. Why does Trump’s face come into focus? Just as well earlier generations had a different view of their responsibility towards their own children’s future.
We need to relate worthy and unworthy passions to the physical:annd the spatial otherwise the leap needed to explain why worthy dreams are smothered in phoney labels is difficult for many. Here are the councillor’s 5 reasons of objection and 5 matching questions she ignores
Not in the Local Plan What happens with this land when the Plan expires?
Significant harm to the Green Belt Harm from whose point of view? Sounds like a nice place for kids to live.
Increased traffic, parking and safety issues. No doubt true. Is this a policy to stop all building, or just on this spot?
Pressure on already stretched local services. Does this take into account to increased rates revenue, national tax base and investment dividends?
Impact on Epping Forest. Was it a historic mistake to build Theydon Bois? What is the actual impact? If her electors are the supposed winners, who are the losers? Why are they ignored?
This councillor’s approach is entirely valid in our existing system of decision making. Unfortunately it also disenfranchises the following groups and problems
the next generation
recognition that new homes are needed, if not here, then where?
these residents are seeking preferential treatment, and offering nil in return. Why?
the economic contribution this investment will make is ignored. Is one sided argument compatible with the responsibilities of civic leadership?
Cllr Holly Whitbread is an experienced local leader. And without doubt a sincere and convinced advocate of her approach. So what is to be done? It is this thinking along these lines that has caused house prices to be unaffordable, deterred investors from investing in new homes despite the demand, produced unliked new homes, undermined trust in planners and the planning system and is stealthily strangulating economic growth. Can she be persuaded to a different point of view? I doubt it. So, if we want a prosperous future for the generations ahead what do we do?
I have one opinion. It is, in 10+ years time, to place in the hands of local councils responsibility for deciding where new homes will go in the 2030s and the decades beyond. By giving them, not landowners these spatial powers. Linked to an obligation to deliver the homes needed within the time scale’s government sets, backed with government sanctions for failure and Treasury rewards for success.
Ian Campbell
25 March 2026
