Comments

Public Comment

The number of houses in Cornwall has doubled in the last 40 years, it was and still is, one of the fastest growing areas in the Country. However, as a prime example of the failure of housing led growth, housing affordability problems for local people on local wages has worsened.

Public Comment

Given the low wage levels in Cornwall, affordable homes are anything but to people trying to get onto the property ladder. Given an income of £16,000 and with a wife and young children to support, what is the cost of an affordable home to me?  Are so called affordable homes a myth and just an in phrase used by planners and developers?

Public Comment

Why are new homes required? What is the existing stock of houses which are empty and/or need refurbishing? Why build thousands of new homes on greenfield sites when many houses stand empty?

Public Comment

Thousands of new quality jobs will be required to support buying these new homes. Who is going to provide the  job opportunities? and why can’t they be provided now to reduced the unemployment which already exists?

Public Comment

Are our MP’s in support of the Regional Spatial Strategy or not? Maybe a more forceful oppositiion is required in Parliament

Comment

I noted with interest that you have published an email from Jean Ellis who lives in Calumet which was formally  the premier copper mining area in Michigan. Jean’s family came orginally from Penponds, Camborne.
I was fortunate enough to visit Calumet in July 2007 for the Cornish Gathering.  The residents are very proud of their Cornish roots and have preserved their mining heritage. Jean Ellis was very supportive of me when I was working so hard to save the Holman no3 site at Trevu from overdevelopment, even going so far as to write to Camborne Town Council,  who, as a matter of interest, recommended refusal. Kerrier however went on to give planning consent  thus ignoring the 500 people who signed a petition asking for the site to be preserved.  You can now look forward to flats with balconies along Trevu Road, planners seem to feel that is the ideall way to promote a world heritage site.
With the ridiculous numbers of buildings that are being proposed by the government and driven by quangos, what is going to happen to our heritage? In Camborne alone we have lost most of. the important buildingst that defined our mining history Tescos pulled down The School of Mines and not content with this went on to destroy Holmans no 1 works. We need to save what’s left, not bury it in concrete.
I am now in the process of contacting Cornish groups all over the world, these people celebrate their heritage, I know they will support our  cause.
In conclusion ,we urgently require homes for local needs there are empty houses in the area, there are brownfield sites, let’s use these to give local people the homes they so badly need.

Councillor Jean Charman Mayor of Camborne

Comment - Report on Internet BBC News Channel (28/03/09)  - interview with Margaret Beckett

A government pledge to build three million affordable new homes by 2020 is in trouble because of the recession, the housing minister has said.
Margaret Beckett said the government must now look at ways to put the programme “back on track” once the downturn comes to an end.
She said the government was doing what it could to help the building industry.
But housing bodies are calling on the government to do more, including invest in the UK’s one million empty homes.

In 2007, Gordon Brown promised to build three million affordable homes to help reduce the housing waiting list, which now stands at nearly five million.
But Mrs Beckett said of the targets: “They were set because of the predicted levels of household growth - that is not going away.
“So of course we’re in difficulty at the present time because there is very little building.
“But what we have to do now is to consider how we can tackle that,” she told BBC News.
“Now we have to consider when this recession comes to an end, which it will, some day, how can we get back on track.”
Richard Diment, of the Federation of Master Builders, said it was unlikely the targets would be met.
He said house building was at about 20% the rate that it was 12 months ago, making it “extremely difficult” to hit the targets.
Mrs Beckett insisted the government was doing all it could to help, including bringing forward £1.2bn of investment in construction, maintenance and repairs.
“We’re doing everything we can to sustain and support [the construction industry]. “We’re working with them to prepare for the upturn when it comes,” she added.
The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (Rics) suggested the only way to deal with the current housing problem was to renovate empty homes.
Simon Rubinsohn, of Rics, said: “While it’s understandable that the government may not feel that this is the easiest way and perhaps the most opportune way of actually dealing with the problem, ultimately I think probably in the short-term, it is the only way.”
David Ireland, head of the campaign group Empty Houses Agency, said the recession meant homes that became empty were staying empty.
He urged for policy change to ensure any investment was correctly targeted and called for housing associations to shift their focus from new builds to regeneration.
Sir Bob Kerslake, chief executive of the government’s Homes and Communities Agency, accepted the government should be doing what it could to put empty properties back into use.
But he said they were empty for a number of reasons, including probate or refurbishment and about half were occupied again within six months.
Margaret Beckett said if there were empty homes the government could help, but urged the local authorities to do more to find them and make them habitable.
“What we’re not going to do is do the jobs that local authorities should be doing.
“They do have opportunities, they do have their own resources and you know we’re keen that they are more pro-active than sometimes some of them have been on this subject,” she said.

Published by: admin on May 8th, 2009 | Filed under Comments




12 Responses to “Comments”

  1. sandra Says:
    August 11th, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    I totally agree that we are now being swamped, the developers will not be satisfied until every blade of grass in Cornwall is built on. All they can see are £ signs each time they look at one of our small farms, they do not see the beauty that is Cornwall. If we are not very careful we will let them get their way and so shoot ourselves in the foot. Mining has gone, Fishing is nearly gone, tourism will end up being confined to Newquay, and who would want to come and visit a place like the one they have just left. Visitors love it here for its uniqueness green fields small hamlets and villages and the very ancientness of Cornwall. So many folk tried to invade us, we fought off all, even the Romans who eventually traded with us instead of taking over. The English have now insidiously come in taking over and removing our Cornishness. We have let them, our children have to move away to work and live, the infrastructure of these developments is not there in reality. If they were at local prices for local people it would not be as bad, but they are not, once again it is to the highest bidder. Please let us keep our green and beautiful county, let us be the judge of where and how many houses can be built, ones that blend in with whats already there, not some pastel painted box. This is our home we do not need mass construction.

  2. Philip Hosking Says:
    August 26th, 2009 at 3:39 pm

    Perhaps the European Landscape Convention may interest you.

    No doubt many in Cornwall will now have heard about the Council of Europe’s (CoE) framework convention for the protection of national minorities (FCNM) and the vital support it would give to indigenous Cornish culture and heritage if only the UK government agreed to recognised the Cornish as a national minority.

    Now though I would like to bring peoples attention to another Council of Europe convention that has potential interest for Kernow.

    The European Landscape Convention (ELC) has been in force in the UK since 1 March 2007. Specifically included within its scope are the coastal waters and territorial seas of its ratifying states. The ELC contains a range of measures aimed at promoting landscape protection, management and planning, underpinned by principles of sustainable development. It specifically recognises the role of landscape as a basic component of cultural heritage and identity and as an important contributor to quality of life, from which its management is a legitimate object of public interest. It also requires that landscape policies should be integrated with all spheres of government policy.

    It is also important to note that under article 5 of the ELC each state has undertaken to “establish procedures for the participation of the general public, local and regional authorities, and other parties with an interest in the definition and implementation of the landscape policies”.

    I would suggest all interested parties need to know the details of the UK Implementation Guidelines that are due to go to Cornwall Council for comment. How if at all will the Cornish public and cultural organisations be able to participate in its implementation in the Duchy?

    The CoE has this to say in summary of the ELC:

    The Convention aims to encourage public authorities to adopt policies and measures at local, regional, national and international level for protecting, managing and planning landscapes throughout Europe. It covers all landscapes, both outstanding and ordinary, that determine the quality of people’s living environment. The text provides for a flexible approach to landscapes whose specific features call for various types of action, ranging from strict conservation through protection, management and improvement to actual creation.

    The Convention proposes legal and financial measures at the national and international levels, aimed at shaping “landscape policies” and promoting interaction between local and central authorities as well as transfrontier cooperation in protecting landscapes. It sets out a range of different solutions which States can apply, according to their specific needs.

    The Council of Europe intergovernmental committees will be supervising the convention’s implementation. The text also provides for a Council of Europe Landscape award, to be given to local or regional authorities or an NGO which introduced exemplary and long-lasting policies or measures to protect, manage and plan landscapes.

    Others organisations working with the ELC include:

    ICOMOS-UK

    European Landscape Network bringing together local and regional authorities, NGOs and Universities in support of the ELC.

  3. Cllr Joyce Duffin Says:
    August 27th, 2009 at 8:27 pm

    With regard to the affordable housing (40 houses) at Portreath. A needs survey is currently being carried out. It is unlikely that planning permission will be given for more houses than the result of the housing need survey.

    Current good practice is for the applicant to discuss plans with the Parish Council and such like before submitting a formal planning application. This is to stop lots of work being done which is then turned down at a later stage. It is hard to make any further comments until we know the result of the housing need survey in Portreath.

  4. Doris Butler Says:
    September 2nd, 2009 at 12:02 am

    It seems once again that the developers have the upper hand with the council and the local residents and people who know the area are ignored - County officials do not seem to get the message that local people need jobs to enable them to buy a house, building houses for people without an income is futile - promises of jobs in the future does not sell houses now. It is not affordable houses that are needed it is social housing for all the people that are unable to find work and for those who are losing their homes because the jobs in the area are disappearing. This is a vicious circle that needs to be broken - houses being built and laying empty until people from out of county buy them and the area slowly dying.

    An average good wage for a young couple must surely only be £30-40,000 an affordable house large enough to raise a family would have to be £70,000 (so the family can eat and have some kind f life) - such a property just does not exist. Even if they could get a mortgage, which I understand is very difficult for a ‘tied affordable house.’

    Surely housing the people on the housing list should be the first priority - then ’shared ownership’ then ‘affordable’ then open market.

    Cornwall County must look after its own first -something that Councillors seem to forget - and do it now - before there are no Cornish young families left in Cornwall.

  5. Philip R Hosking Says:
    October 17th, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    Hello all

    I’d just like to bring to your attention a blog article on the Cornish Democrat that I think is relevent to your respective campaigns.

    Kernow’s not for sale!: http://thecornishdemocrat.blogspot.com/2009/10/kernows-not-for-sale.html

    Please note that your campaigns are linked to on my blog

    –
    Oll an gwella

    Philip Hosking

  6. Via email Says:
    January 23rd, 2010 at 4:16 pm

    Received by email- Fri 22nd Jan 2010
    This evening local news was about Wadebridge, apparently, the Council up there want to sell off the Council offices and move to another plot 15 miles away and build a new Council office building. That is going to cost several millions. The reasoning behind that is that the offices cost too much to run. It didn’t look in bad repair or old at all, in fact in made the Council offices in Camborne look geriatric.

    The interesting part of it is that Tesco’s have shown great interest in the old Council offices and would like the plot to build yet another store. Apparently it would appear that Tesco have offered vast amounts of money for the site.

    Obviously the population of Wadebridge are up in arms and intend to fight this decision of the Council tooth and nail.

    It will be interesting to see who wins, Council, Tesco’s, or the people that actually live in the town. Good luck to the residents of Wadebridge is what I say!!!!!

    BY TA: On the subject of who will win, there will need to be a concentrated effort by the local residents because recent history would indicate that the planners and many of our locally elected representatives take precious little notice otherwise.
    A combination of Tesco and the CC would prove to be a heavyweight adversary, but the local residents of Wadebridge have strength of numbers if they are motivated to oppose this.

  7. Via email Says:
    January 23rd, 2010 at 4:17 pm

    Via email 20th Jan 2010

    Thanks for organising the meeting last Friday - it was very useful.

    The way forward must be political.

    We can safely assume that if the Cornish Electorate were asked ‘Are you in favour of 68,000 new houses in Cornwall as directed by the Government’ at least 80% would vote against it. If however they were asked ‘Some housing is needed and it should up to local Government (i.e. the Council) to decide’ then I expect that 80% will be for it. On that reasonable presumption then by all County Councilors must also be against the 68,000 as they are elected to carry out the wishes of the electorate and not their own should they be different. Thus the whole Council (incl. the Cabinet) must be against it.. Maybe this should be pointed out to each councilor.

    Clearly the Council have no option but to tell Government that Cornwall do not want this, we should refuse to do it and delay any work towards implementing this. One would ask, with the Council in dire financial trouble, why are our planners spending time and money on something that Cornwall does not want? This work should be stopped. I hear the cry from Council - ‘We cannot do that’ - well lets try and see what happens. We stood up to Hitler. This is the greatest threat to Cornwall since 1940. What is Government going to do - put the Chairman and the Cabinet in jail? Hardly.

    Also the Council’s Chairman should be speaking to other councils that are in a similar position and say ‘Cornwall are not going to do it - come and join us with the fight against Government’. I bet the Government would back down when faced by a country wide revolt!

    When the plans for the Unitary Authority were fought and the Districts had their polls, I wrote to Ben Bradshaw, then Minister for the SW, suggesting that he should take note of local opinion. In a standard letter reply he said that they had carried out their own poll, by Mori I think, and it gave a different answer.

    Government like official polls - so why don’t we pay someone recognised, like Mori, to carry out a poll for us? The results could be useful ammunition. There could be two questions something on the lines of:

    1. Do you want 68,000 extra houses ( a population increase of about 150,000) - or 10 Helstons) to be built in Cornwall at locations selected by the Government? Yes or No

    2. Do you accept that Cornwall needs some additional housing and that the amount, location and type should be decided by local people? Yes or No.

    They are not loaded questions but I think that we can be sure of the answers.

    BY TA: We are in complete accord with this viewpoint. We know for a fact that there are members of the CC who state that they are opposed to this level of mass build, but when it comes to a vote, many vote in favour. They did so at the old District level, and they are now doing so at CC level.
    No matter what the local electorate say, it seems, many CCs are not prepared, on our behalf, to challenge the Government on this. What we suggest is for the electorate to challenge their respective councillors on this very topic.
    With respect to the question of a poll, TA will look at this to see if it is a feasible option. After 12 months of talking with local residents and other groups around the Duchy, we agree that, assuming the questions are not slanted or ambiguous, the answer regarding the presently proposed plans would overwhelmingly align with the viewpoint of TA.

  8. Via email Says:
    January 27th, 2010 at 3:43 pm

    Via email 25th Jan 2010
    Trelawney Alliance is against the mass build on green field sites. Eleven thousand houses planned for Camborne Redurth area. The Treswithian green field sites should be a worry to all the residents of Camborne and Redruth. There is no indication where the employment for these people, who would require mortgages would come. No obvious plans for the infrastructure to go with this large development, this too would require even more land for the building of schools, doctors surgery’s, fire station, dental surgery’s, have you tried to get a National Health Service dentist recently? No luck eh! Just think what it would be like with an extra twenty thousand residents in our area. No doubt Tesco’s would love to build another large store for all these new customers. More land gone! Yes, that would bring employment, but at what cost, low wages and part time employment again. This would keep the new population on the bread line, at least then the long term residents of Camborne and Redruth wouldn’t feel too hard done by, they are already on the bread line. So no change there then.

    The other reasons for protecting our green fields are so obvious, our great prime minister says we should be growing more food for the increasing population. He just doesn’t mention where. He and his government have plans to concrete over most of it. Once the green fields are gone, they are gone forever. We in Cornwall have such wonderful pasture lands. Let’s fight to keep them. We also rely on the tourist industry. Love it or dislike it, Cornwall needs the tourist industry. We don’t have any other industry left, so we must ensure that Cornwall remains a green and pleasant place to visit. To get away from the concrete jungles that, for example, where the people of Birmingham live, for two weeks holiday in Cornwall, to spend money getting here, spend a fortune on accommodation to stay here and to feed themselves whilst here, costs them a great deal. In fairness we need to make it a pleasurable experience, so that they return to us and spend that fortune again year after year. If we become a long string of housing from Redruth to Penzance, will they find us so appealing? I don’t think so.

    We really must take an interest in the plans for the area in which we live. If our feelings are not made known, the powers that be will do whatever they want with our Cornwall, after all it’s not in their back yard is it?

    By TA - This email typifies the comments we we hear on a regular basis and we consider to be the viewpoint of the (unfortunately) silent majority. We agree without question that the mass build planned is unsustainable and our tourist industry will be severely damaged

  9. Via email Says:
    January 30th, 2010 at 4:59 pm

    I agree with all you have said and all you are working for as the Trelawney Alliance. I attended the meeting on the 15th and have to say my main disappointment was that the “speakers”, one in particular, exceeded the allocated time and thus shortened the public speaking time considerably. Luckily, a good number had their say.

    I feel that more of these meetings would be beneficial in letting the powers that be know that we are not prepared to sit down to be stepped on and dictated to.

    It is very important to concentrate on the employment side of the area before considering the infrastructure and then the housing. Regarding the construction of new houses, could it not be considered that the rate band system could be used and that lower rate band houses should be sold to local people only leaving the more expensive properties only on the open market. This has worked for many years in places like Jersey and Guernsey so could not this be investigated?

    I cannot believe the Crofty site has even been contemplated as a place to build properties. Where does the fact that there are holes and tunnels underground as well as high radon and arsenic levels on this site come into the equation. Who will be prepared to supply mortgages on these properties? Probably no one, leaving the developers to let the properties at high rentals so we will still be getting nowhere.

    Lastly, the latest Government wishes is to grow more food and cultivate more land. If most of the greenfield sites are to be concreted over, how are we supposed to manage that?

    Needed to air my views, keep me posted

    BY TA: Thank you for your comment regarding time allowed to speakers has been noted and this was discussed at our last committee meeting. We have devised a method of improved control and this will be inplemented at our next public meeting.

  10. Via email Says:
    January 30th, 2010 at 6:03 pm

    Homes take away land for food
    THE UK is entering an age of austerity: ‘Make and grow’ will become the watchwords of the era. But there is a limit to what Britain can do for itself.
    Hilary Benn, the agriculture secretary, said that to secure its food security, the UK needs to start producing more of its own food. The UK’s ability to feed itself relies on the country enjoying access to a well-diversified mix of deep markets and existing greenfield land; and its ability to manufacture relies on industry surviving and growing. The UK buys food from around the world -mostly from the EU, which provides 69% of the country’s food imports. However, this does expose our country to global food price spikes. DEFRA has just published results that because of the EU inflated food prices we paid £3.2 billion more in 2007 than we should have: that’s another £57 each. In the year to July 2008, UK food prices rose by 12.8%. This placed a strain on all families.
    Market food prices may one day rise and stay high. But, in that case, marginal land - in Britain and elsewhere - will come into use to keep them in check. The more houses we build on greenfield sites, the less food we will be able to grow.
    Therefore, Mr Benn should focus his efforts on making sure that the current system works and that all of these area action plans to build thousands and thousands of houses are torn up. Food markets must remain open, land must be farmed.
    DEREK ELLIOTT
    By TA: Well researched and is a clear example of Government departments not talking to each other and stiking a sensible balance. One department says we must grow more food and another says build on the fields ! Total lack of joined up thinking !

  11. Via email Says:
    March 11th, 2010 at 2:53 pm

    I had a phone call this evening from Cllr Dolley in response to my letter concerning the conduct of the Camborne Planning Committee meeting.
    She explained that she voted for it as she was on the committee that approved it in principle a few months ago. So, she said, ” it would have been undemocratic of me to vote against it this time. In any case, it was approved then and so is going ahead anyway. ”
    So I then asked her what the purpose of having last Tuesday’s meeting was, and she replied ” I’m not prepared to discuss it ”

    Local democracy has gone out of the window !

  12. Stuart Guppy Says:
    March 12th, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    I took the matter of the lack of microphones and the general conduct of this appalling meeting up with the councillors. One told me that the application was approved a few months ago. The meeting on 2nd March was to tidy up design points etc. Well, I did not get that impression. Why did councillors make objections about air pollution ? Why did Cllr Jean Charman have to plead her case so well ? A complete waste of everyone’s time if it was already done and dusted. Local democracy has gone out of the window and needs clawing back smartly.

Leave a Comment

rss feed

Copyright © Trelawney Alliance - Hosted by FTI Cornwall