Deputy PM blamed for erosion of Green Belt |
|
|
Published
:
Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:05 |
The Green Belt has been eroding thanks to the efforts of Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, opposition parties said yesterday.
Area which had been formerly designated as the Green Belt had 60 percent more houses built on them during the period 1998 to 2003. According to figures from the office of the Deputy PM, there were 3,287 houses on Green Belt land during the three years 1994-1996; the number rose to 5,265 from 1998 to 2003.
The Tories were outright in blaming Prescott for the destruction, saying the Green Belt was under “sustained assault from Mr Prescott’s army of bulldozers and concrete mixers.”
The South-East countryside was the worst victim of the onslaught from the housing brigade under Labour: The number of new houses on this tract of land grew from 553 in 1996 to 802 in 1998 and 1,175 at the turn of the century. The North-West saw a similar invasion with the number of houses rising to 1,565 in 2003 - more than 100 percent above 1996’s 730 houses.
The difference was visible from the year Tony Blair was elected Prime Minister – 1997. That year house building on Green Belt land rose to 4,456 houses, then to 4,910 in 1998 and 5,691 in 2001.
The Tories offered the example of the Newcastle Great Park, a 1,200-acre land which was previously designated Green Belt. In 2000, Deputy PM Prescott approved proposals for “executive” homes with sprawling estates on this land. About 2,700 such houses and a business estate are currently under construction here.
The local council obliged by removing the site from the Tyne and Wear Green Belt. The development scheme would create thousands of jobs besides curbing the city’s population drain, they reasoned. They also said that the environment would be unharmed by the new housing because the planners included condensing boilers and cycle routes for each property and public transport for people working at the sites.
Liberal Democrat Norman Baker said the government was “redesignating land as Green Belt simply to fiddle figures”.
Opposition members said there was now a greater need for empowerment of local councils who can reject or approve development proposals in rural England.
|
|
|
|
|
|