Local Lies

"The time has come to disperse power more widely in Britain today."

A portentous call to arms, these words rang from the Coalition Agreement signed by David Cameron and Nick Clegg back in May 2010. The Liberal Democrats especially hailed it as a declaration of intent to devolve power to communities and give back control to local people. The Tories gleefully portrayed it as a decisive step away from the centralism of the defeated labour Government, its years tarnished by control freakery and an anal obsession with targets.

Key to the process has been the Localism Bill, currently due to become law later this year. The Government has trailed this as doing away with Westminster control of what happens in our communities, especially in areas like planning and development, and putting people in charge of their local area. Local referenda on a host of subjects will be able to be called by local people.

Just last week, I took part on a panel of local election candidates debating the Local Development Framework proposed by our local Council Planning department under the Labour Government's rules on strategic planning for most of the next two decades. Tens of thousands of new homes are proposed - with several thousand on greenbelt land and more on greenfield land - even although the statistics used to forecast need are, at least, unproven. Needless to say, everyone on the panel agreed with the angry audience of some 150 local people that the local greenbelt/greenfield should be protected and the houses not built. But local people and even the local councillors would not have the final say - this would be taken instead by the full council for the district, where these people and their representatives would have only a small say and represent 3 votes out of 99.

Step forward the local Tory MP with his brilliant solution - delay the vote, delay any decision. The Government is about to do away with the old targets and although local authorities will still need to plan ahead, local people can develop their own neighbourhood plans and even hold local referenda to prevent buildings they don't want.

Sounds good. Almost too good to be true?

Indeed, it is at best a case of blatant "over-selling". Localism and the legislation enacting it, on closer inspection, turns out to be little more than a messy "pig-in-a-poke". No surprise given its provenance on the desk of Communities Secretary Eric Pickles and his trusty Orc, Grant Shapps, the Housing Minister.

The Localism Bill proposes to give communities - either Parish Councils or undefined "Community Forums" - the right to establish Neighbourhood Development Plans. Under these, these groups will be able to identify where they want houses to be built and what types of houses are required - "providing the plan is in line with the strategic vision for the area set by the local authority", local people can then vote on it and if they pass it, the houses (or other types of buildings) can be constructed more quickly than under the current planning regime.

Save our fields from the Sontarans - Pickles at work

Nothing there about stopping unwanted developments. Indeed, the Bill goes further to create a "right to build" to community groups wanting to construct small developments (no definition of small, or of community groups).

And if some big developer decides they want to plop a giant housing scheme in the local area, what powers to resist will local people have?

Well, the developer will have requirement to consult with local people before submitting their plans. Consult? That's all. People can be as against it as they like, the developer can still go ahead and submit the application. And with new Government rules creating a default "yes" to development, it will be difficult to stop the process. The guidance is unclear - it does seem there may be some right for locals to demand a referendum, but the local council will only have to take its outcome into account - it will not be binding.

With the Government now offering cash-strapped councils bonuses for each new house built, and opening up a potential scandal with proposed land auctions, the momentum will be with the developers and what little new "power" local communities may have will be swept away under a thick layer of concrete and tarmac. Little wonder that, after some initial concerns, the British property Federation Chair has welcomed the Bill on the grounds that they are:

...re-assured by the emphasis that the Government is now placing on growth and the way in which localism is to be used as the vehicle for encouraging communities to opt, not for nimbyism, but for the sustainable development of both the homes and commercial property that our economy so desperately needs.

So much for power to the people and so much for protecting our green and pleasant land.

A grim future for the green belt?

"No Grant" Shapps and the Social Housing Scandal

UK Housing Minister Grant Shapps visited Collyhurst in north Manchester today to talk to local people after a long promised Private Finance Initiative (PFI) redevelopment scheme for the social housing estate was scrapped. £250 millions of promised funding has been withdrawn, leaving the local council, housing organisations and local community groups scrabbling to apply for a much reduced £39 million pot which is by no means guaranteed.

Grant Shapps & boss Eric Pickles

However, Mr Shapps was decidedly upbeat about all this. Although on Radio 4's PM programme (at 42 mins) the chair of the local community association sounded decidedly despairing, the Minister insisted the residents had "got localism" and rather than worrying about losing at least £210 millions of development funding, were busy planning for the future.

Well, of course they would be doing that. Unlike the wealthy Mr Shapps, they have no choice and no means of going elsewhere. Like 1.8 million people on social housing waiting lists, they are stuck where they are now that the Government has effectively gutted both the redevelopment and maintenance budgets for the sector. With housing welfare also under extreme pressure, the housing associations which are now the main providers of low cost social housing are busy cutting costs, staff and services. A whole swathe of people among the poorest and most vulnerable are struggling to keep a roof over their heads - and when they do, as likely as not it will be leaking.

But perhaps one of the most staggering comments from Mr Shapps, once he had surveyed the estate with its rotten window frames, mouldy walls and, for residents, huge heating costs, was this:“(Collyhurst) is clearly in a state which needs long overdue work. The interesting thing is most  of the estate dates from the 80s but it’s in a terrible condition.”

We live in times which have no history, no knowledge or awareness of what has gone before - or perhaps it is just denial. Because of course social housing constructed in the 1980s and early 1990s will be in a terrible condition now : built to the most minimal standards under the Thatcher Conservatives, the materials and specifications used were appalling. What had been a charitable movement to provide housing for people with specific needs was being steamrollered by Conservative Government policy to replace general needs council housing. Funding was being poured into the sector but with tight conditions about what was to be built - nothing too good, basically - and then with a requirement for progressively more and more privately-raised funding to be used.

The consequences were obvious to everyone, as I learned when I attended the opening of a new sheltered housing scheme in Bradford, a city at that time run by Shapps' current boss, the intellectually-flatulent Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles. As local dignitaries slapped each other on the back, I stood looking at the communal lounge with one of the senior staff who had worked on the building. The timber fittings were well varnished, new carpets lined the floors and rather pleasant sofas and easy chairs were positioned for residents to relax on over a cup of tea with their neighbours. It had all the appearance of a community in the making.

"It looks really good," I complimented.
"Well yes," the developer replied. "But let's face it, it won't be here in twenty years."
"Why?" I asked in surprise. "Is something else due to be built here?"
"No," came the reply. "But it's built with crap. It will all have fallen down by then!"

Grant Shapps' party's last Government destroyed decades of good housing practice. Like its 1960s Labour predecessor with its well-intentioned but misguided foray into tower block construction, the 1979-97 Tory regime ignored the long view. Unlike Old Labour, it happily skimmed plenty off for its construction industry allies - though with its continuing smooch with the PFI after Blair's ascension, New Labour did little to improve things.
 

Listen @  http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00y374t/PM_31_01_2011

Now, as Shapps retreats to the comforts of his 5-bedroomed detached house in Hertfordshire, perhaps at the controls of his very own personal aeroplane, the occupants of social housing everywhere are left with his twisted NuSpeak ringing in their ears, his smarmy smile beaming down at them as he slices their communities and life chances away.

In an increasingly rare flash of insight, a leading Lib Dem Councillor has decried Shapps and Pickles as the "Laurel and Hardy" of the Government. But as many people in Collyhurst huddle in cold rooms and damp houses in tonight's freezing January weather, it really is no laughing matter.