Our view
The character of the countryside changes irrevocably because of decisions made by central and regional government and local planning authorities across England. National Government also shapes the direction and speed of change through its planning policy framework.
The major defences against the wrong kind of change are smarter Government policy, a strong planning system, informed by high quality evidence which enables local views to be properly heard and proper assessment of the impact of planning decisions on the environment.
Some Government policy is heading in the right direction but not fast enough. Other policy is heading in the wrong direction. Take three examples: housing, roads and flying.
Housing
The Government set a target for 60% of new housing to be built on brownfield sites in 2000. Nationally we have already achieved 75% but the targets remain stubbornly low, so performance is patchy across different authorities. Raising the bar would encourage more reuse of derelict and disused sites – recycling a renewable resource – and help regeneration. Instead most developers favour large urban extensions on greenfield sites which are cheaper for them to develop …and are nearer to attractive undisturbed countryside.
Roads
Government continues to devote billions to building new roads and widening others. Yet years ago it became clear that new roads get congested quickly by generating new traffic because they encourage people to go further and faster for work and leisure. So, if policy doesn’t change, this damaging cycle could carry on, with huge destruction of the countryside and intrusion spreading further and wider. Instead we could direct public money to making other ways of getting round more attractive. Rail, bus and coach, cycling, walking could become the first choice not the second.
Flying
Government seems to want massive aviation expansion. New runways and terminals are planned to handle tens of millions more passengers. Low cost flying is a key driver of change, yet the real cost is borne by many thousands of people and the countryside we enjoy. Thousands will lose their homes; many more will suffer greater noise and air pollution; new flight paths will shatter the tranquillity of protected landscapes. But Government could support alternatives such as rail for short haul flights or manage demand for air travel.
The solutions are not simple but they are available. But what is the Government doing? It is proposing to revise the planning system to make it easier for major building projects such as roads, runways and power infrastructure to go ahead. Planning decisions on such projects would be taken by an unelected body, who would decide if and when the public could have its say. We need to ensure the Government uses proper evidence to justify major developments, follows plans drawn up by democratically elected bodies and respects the rights of local people to be heard. Decisions should take full account of proper environmental assessment of their impact including the degree to which they cast the shadow of development intrusion across the countryside.
