Attack on local democracy

Saving our Green Belt after years of campaigning was only possible because of the consultation processes which Councils are obliged to follow to give the public the right to comment. The Government's devastating planning reforms would deny you this opportunity in future. If you want to continue to have a meaningful, democratic say on future Local Plans and planning applications, please act now by sending a quick email to object by Thursday 29th October.

Here's how to join the torrent of criticism and revolt from back bench MPs, including Theresa May, against the Government's planning white paper and make your voice heard before your rights are stripped away. As we wait to see how a new Bucks Plan will shape up, it is vitally important that you object to the Government planning reforms so that we can all continue to play a full part in the planning process, rather than having a new undemocratic system imposed on us from high.

Some people prefer a quick "nutshell guide" on how to respond and others prefer more detail, so both options are provided below.

The email address to send your objections to is:

The deadline is Thursday 29th October.

In a nutshell

Watch the 8 minute CPRE youtube video about the reforms here:

Points to include in your email:

Question 4 - this question asks you to list your top 3 priorities for planning locally. These may include protecting the Green Belt; environment and biodiversity; action on climate change; better local infrastructure; protection of heritage; provision of social housing; design; homes for the homeless; homes for young people; supporting the high street; supporting the economy.

Question 5 - no, I do not agree that Local Plans should be simplified in line with the proposals. The reforms are undemocratic and put speed and enabling developers to "build build build" above democracy and local community involvement. Green Belt must be protected. The standard algorithm for calculating housing need is unjustified and includes an alost 100% uncapped uplift in our area. Ther proposals would not address affordability because developers just build to the market. The proposals amount to a centralised diktat and negate local involvement. The public examination stage of Local Plan preparation must be retained in full and there must be full local involvement from start to finish of the Local Plan process and no "self-assessment" by local planning authorities.

Question 8 - any standard method for calculating housing need must properly take into account restraints such as Green Belt which must be protected. An uncapped standard methodology producing hyper-inflated unjustified housing numbers, such as that proposed, is completely unacceptable. I do not support the standard methodology proposed. This would not address affordability.

Question 9 - I do not agree that there should be automatic outline planning consent for areas of substantial development because this excludes the voice of local communities.

Question 10 - "protected areas" mut be protected, not just subject to "restricted" development. Green Belt must be truly protected.

Question 16 - protection of the Green Belt and Natura 2000/Special areas of conservation, real sustainability and action on climate change must be priorities.

In more detail

You can read the consultation paper here:

You can read our response to the consultation here which may give you ideas on how to respond.

Thank you!

Powered by Charity Edit