The draft local plan falsely assumes that:
:: The area requires 395 houses a year (this is a false assumption as our own successive governments are pursuing policies which will lead to economic decline, as are the governments of Europe)
:: Building houses increases economic growth
:: Building houses is sustainable
:: Building houses is in our interest (the country will need the land for food production when oil prices render imported food as too expensive)
:: The cost of building the houses will be born by government
:: Related infrastructure issues can be resolved by changing people’s behaviour patterns, like expecting residents to walk instead of use a car.
:: The costs of the developments are as stated, without including the additional costs to us, as residents, which will arise from such development... increased provision of services such as welfare, schooling, all of which will need to be paid for by increasing taxes and other local and national charges (water rates etc) and making up the difference by borrowing.
There is a way we might force the issue. If you could ask the electorate in each councillor’s territory to inform you if they support the building of more housing or are against it, then they will know that as councillors they are without integrity if they vote against the wishes of their electorate.
Likewise the MP can be informed that unless he supports the people of this area they, too, will be informed at the next election that he did not support them and they will vote accordingly.
To allow our councillors to vote for a plan which is based on false assumptions is unacceptable. They know most residents want far fewer houses.
Why not ask the public to respond to a carefully-written questionnaire so their views can then be made public and the politicians can then bring pressure to bear on the government?
E C Emerson