Effingham Eye: Election Special

Published on: 28 Apr, 2019
Updated on: 29 Apr, 2019

Chris Dick gives his personal report on Effingham events. Here is his borough election special…

With the council elections just a few days away now seemed a good time to find out a little more about our Effingham candidates for borough council.

The three candidates are; Liz Hogger (Liberal Democrat), Christopher Jay (Conservative) and Ben Paton (Guildford Greenbelt Group). All candidates were asked the same questions:

In answer to questions about national issues, Liz Hogger (Lib Dem) said: “In Effingham, normally national politics has little influence on local elections, and residents do tend to vote for the person, not the party. This time around, the Brexit fiasco is having some effect, ranging from, “What a mess! I’ll never vote Tory again!” to a few who say they are fed up with all of us and won’t vote.

“One resident greeted me with, “I’ve torn up my polling card in disgust!”, but then was happy to talk about planning and the difference I can make as borough councillor. Having explained to her that you don’t need your polling card to vote, I am optimistic she may decide to use her vote after all.”

Liz commented on how residents had complained about the government and the Planning Inspectorate trampling on local democracy by over-ruling local planning decisions. And that the Berkeley Homes / Howard of Effingham planning appeal decision had left many Effingham residents with a sense of grievance against this government.

Liz Hogger

Regarding the green belt, Liz said: “I have fought to protect Effingham’s green belt for many years, on specific planning applications as well as local planning policy. The main concern which looms large over this election campaign is the planning appeal decision by the Secretary of State to allow Berkeley Homes to build 295 new homes and a new enlarged school on our greenbelt.

“I worked hard as part of the parish council team supporting the borough council’s refusal of that planning application at the public inquiry. We put forward a very good case, supported by EFFRA (Effingham Residents Association) and local residents, but in the end, local opinion and good planning arguments were ignored, and I remain very angry about that.”

When speaking to residents on the doorstep Liz had found most of them appreciative of the efforts she and the parish council had made in their fight the Berkeley Homes proposals. She went on to say that residents agree: “The most we can do is try to get the best outcome for Effingham from the detailed planning applications to come.”

Liz expressed her dismay with the Guildford Local Plan that now proposes to take far more land out of the green belt than is needed to accommodate the reduced housing target. She added: “I am outraged that the new town of 2,000 homes on the former Wisley Airfield remains in the Plan. Local people know very well that Wisley Airfield is not a sustainable location: it would be a car-dependent community, pouring traffic onto our local roads and damaging the environment.”

On the subject of congestion and limited parking at Effingham Station Liz said: “Increased traffic congestion is the big worry arising from the Berkeley Homes plans. Although we have managed to get some improvements for pedestrian safety on the proposals for The Street, the highways works were agreed by Berkeley Homes with Surrey County Council at the Public Inquiry and we had little say in the details.

“I would like to see a “Neighbourhood Zone” for the centre of the village and around the schools, with a 20mph limit and priority for pedestrians, especially school children. Some residents have told me they are interested in joining a working group to investigate this, and I would like to make that happen soon.”

Liz said that parking at Effingham Junction Station was an increasing nightmare with no obvious solution given the reluctance of railway authority to do anything about it. She considered one option might be to have a regular bus service to the station for commuters, perhaps even a community bus if volunteers could be found to organise it.

On the matter of transparency regarding local decisions made by councils or Government ministers, Liz said: “The Executive system at the borough council makes it too easy for decisions to be taken behind closed doors, with little input from back-bench councillors or local residents. This is wrong in principle, but also makes for bad decision-making, and it needs to change.

“At government level, once again for Effingham this revolves around the appeal decision, with most people convinced that was a political decision rather than based on planning merit.”

And finally, Liz told The Guildford Dragon: “I want to make sure our Neighbourhood Plan is respected by planners so that future development proposals provide the sort of new homes local people need, rather than the homes developers want to build, respecting the Conservation Area and the rural character of our village.

“Moving away from planning, I want to deliver the Lib Dem manifesto promise to help everyone do their bit to fight climate change and tackle air pollution. We need to do more to encourage cycling and walking in Effingham, and take practical steps to improve our environment.

“Above all, I want to make sure Effingham’s voice is heard and taken into account in the decisions which affect our community.”

Christopher Jay

In answer to questions about national issues, Chris Jay (Conservative) said: “The only national issue that has been raised is Brexit and the government’s inability to get on with its promise to get us out of the EU.  One can only sympathise with this view and try to direct the conversation to local matters.”

On the subject of green belt development, Chris said: “Green belt development is opposed and quite rightly should be.” He added: “With the new houses in Effingham and [potentially] at Wisley it is vital that Network Rail enlarges the station car park by building a multi-story structure on the present site. I believe that the maintenance of green spaces, including school playing fields, which must not be sold off for development and the greenbelt is crucial to maintain the character of Effingham.

“I oppose the creeping development that joins village to village and the overbuilding on small sites leading to cramped accommodation without adequate parking.”

Chris added that there must be no encroachment on Effingham Common in order to meet the new increased parking needs that would inevitably come about as a result of these developments.

On the subject of transparency in local and national government, Chris said: “Transparency in local and national government decision making is not a problem I have come across.  At borough council level there seems to be adequate openness and accountability.”

And finally, in response to a question on what he hoped to achieve for local residents Chris said: “I would hope to maintain the character of Effingham as a pleasant village in which to live and work.  In particular, there must be proper infrastructure around the new Lower Road/Howard of Effingham development. Close cooperation with the Conservative county councillor Julie Iles will be vital.

Ben Paton

In answer to questions about national issues, Ben Paton (Guildford Greenbelt Group) said: “There’s plenty of upset over Brexit. Everyone feels alienated.” He added, “I actually think we should be proud that the British Parliament is the only one in Europe that has had the conviction, like Oliver Twist, to ‘ask for more’!”

On the subject of green belt development, Ben said: “Green belt is a catch-all phrase for sustainable development ie putting houses near jobs, transport and facilities and not on green fields. Everyone is fed up with the ‘doublespeak’, the public lip-service to the principles and the clever circumlocutions to justify bending the rules.

“Local government is being directed by an alliance between developers and planning authorities to build as many houses as possible regardless of the sustainability of the type of house or the location. This is often based on the ‘we give you planning permission and you pay for infrastructure’ approach to planning.

“Planning permission to build on green fields is a get-rich-quick scheme. Local politicians are complicit in this. 25% more houses – some 60% of them on the green belt – can’t be brushed off as ‘only’ a few per cent of the greenbelt. The designation ‘green belt’ is less important than the fact that this form of development defies basic principles of sustainability – like minimising car use. Getting house builders to build roads and schools that government should pay for in exchange for planning permissions is bribing residents with their own social assets.”

On the subject of congestion and parking at Effingham Station, Ben said: “It is obviously already at full capacity. But the alliance, between developers and planning authorities, never wishes to let the facts get in the way.”

Regarding transparency, Ben said: “30% more houses in Effingham, the largest expansion of the village since it was first founded. Effingham was a sacrifice the Minister was prepared to make on the altar of a false and failed housing policy. It is so profitable building on green fields that the developer is willing to buy the government a new school in exchange for planning permission. ‘Exceptional’ is the wrong adjective.”

When asked what he hoped to achieve for local Effingham residents Ben said: “Think of me as like a barrister, here to promote your causes, not mine, not the council’s and not the government’s. Give me the evidence and I will make the arguments.

“In the old days, no one ever got fired for buying IBM or felt bad about voting Conservative, Labour or Lib Dem in a local election. But big brands, go past their sell-by dates. So don’t choose the ‘big brand’ labels that are all advertising and no substance. You’ve heard the promises before. They weren’t kept.”

Share This Post