Opinion: Locally and Nationally We Are Politically Divided But Some Remedies Are Possible

Published on: 2 Aug, 2017
Updated on: 3 Aug, 2017

By Martin Giles

Nearly two months since the general election and the political scene remains confused. There will be consequences for Guildford but these are also unclear.

Nationally we are as divided as ever over the EU and Brexit. Remainers might be hoping that with the passage of time Brexit might become softer and softer, they might even continue to hope for a second referendum, while leavers could be more and more frustrated over the time the divorce is expected to take and the predictions that little will change for some years.

The general election did nothing to increase national unity. Even if the opinion polls were correct, and most think that now the referendum result is known the politicians should just get on with it, the Conservatives did not win their expected victory.

And even though Labour claim to have accepted the referendum result their MPs give mixed messages. Some, with an apparently futile hope that we can remain in the Single Market, are simply unable to countenance an outcome that would significantly constrain immigration levels, even though it was the issue that decided the votes of many of their supporters, in the North, in the 2016 referendum.

Some Tories, including some at cabinet level, seem to share the concern that limiting immigration will have an intolerable economic cost.

Locally, the main impact of all this is that the extra demand for housing caused by high immigration levels is unlikely to decrease anytime soon. Indeed, Guildford’s position just 30 miles from London, means the demand is practically limitless.

Even less than the 48% support given to the Conservatives can give complete domination under FPTP.

But our first past the post system and perhaps the seemingly hollow promises to protect the green belt, given during the election campaign in 2015, has ensured that the borough council remains dominated by the Conservatives. Their leaders at Guildford Borough Council remain determined to proceed with a Local Plan that still, despite an unusually high level of objection in the public consultations, includes proposals for significant developments on the green belt.

Note one seat has been lost by the Conservatives in a by-election since 2015 and won by Labour.

The opposition and its largest party the Lib Dems are split on the issue, reducing its effectiveness. While the Guildford Greenbelt Group’s three councillors, despite representing 14% of those who voted in 2015, are too often treated contemptuously with shameful arrogance by a small number of leading councillors.

Although the argument is generally accepted that more affordable housing should be provided, most, including council leader Paul Spooner, agree that the planned developments will not significantly reduce house prices. Certainly, it is unlikely that the planned new private houses will help the several thousand on the council’s housing list. Surely what is needed for them is more social housing.

But the council seems, like the government, besotted with economic growth, at all costs apparently. Of course, it would be strange if the economy did not grow roughly in line with the increasing population but to assume that all is okay as long as our GDP increases, the normal measurement of growth, is unwise.

In any case, whether recent growth is being properly shared out seems doubtful, especially with the increased competition faced by native unskilled workers and population growth cannot continue inexorably on a relatively small island without damaging our environment irreparably. Some might say it already is.

Nonetheless, GBC is willing to accept the constraints placed on them by central government planning policy, policed by the planning inspectorate, and the preservation of all of our existing green belt is looking unlikely.

It is said that only a few per cent of green belt land will be given up but the areas around the new developments will inevitably be affected, made less attractive and devalued. Who is to say that with continuing demand in years to come a little more of the marginal green belt will be given up?

Anyway, giving up green belt land is not the only answer to the housing shortage. Amongst other possible measures the government could take is first, to stop or limit foreign investment in UK housing and, second, to prohibitively tax empty housing and undeveloped brown field sites.

Most essentially, the government must understand that the South East is already suffering badly from its density of population while other areas of the UK are in far greater need of economic investment and development.

Share This Post