Bob Neill’s recasting of Conservative planning/housing policy – indeed, his redefinition of party leader David Cameron’s recent statement on planning – is doubtless welcome to those who feared the Tory proposals would undermine an extremely fragile upturn in building (‘Planning is safe in our hands’, March 12–18).
But the assertion from Neill, the shadow local government secretary, that I ‘misunderstood’ Tory housing policy, cannot go unchallenged (‘Left High and Dry’, February 26-March 4).
My feature was partly based on a long conversation with the shadow housing minister, Grant Shapps. We discussed devolving powers for new housing down to the community/village level – a theme picked up by Cameron in a recent speech – and inducements that would be offered to encourage people to vote ‘yes’ in local referendums, where 90% support for development would be required.
Ninety per cent? A bit high perhaps? Well, senior housing professionals, including some advising the shadow housing team, have already cautioned strongly against this. Indeed, I have written about this elsewhere and quoted them.
When this point was put to Grant Shapps, he emphasised that the proposals would be piloted in a particular area where support for new development was high – he specifically mentioned Essendon, in his Welwyn-Hatfield constituency. The plans would then be rolled out elsewhere when, Shapps
stressed, the threshold could be reduced.
A ‘substantial error’ on my part, as Bob Neill asserts?
Not by me, guvnor!
Peter Hetherington
Wylam, Northumberland
