Planning rule changes reveal a government out of touch

THAN you for publishing an excellent Editorial (Yorkshire Post, September 7) on planning reforms. It should be forwarded to all MPs regardless of party, though sadly those who need to take take notice will continue to bury their heads in the sand.

As you correctly say, removing planning restrictions in an attempt to reinvigorate the economy smacks very much of an out-of-touch Government trying to impose panic measures without considering the consequences.

Recently the same Government decided that all our GPs should be assessed annually for competence.

Following the Budget farce, this planning disaster suggests that our MPs and their civil service advisers should be similarly assessed.

Like many others who were desperate to see the back of the Blair/Brown era, after three years of this Government I feel completely disillusioned with political leaders, who don’t listen to their own backbench MPs, let alone the great British public.

From: Bob Watson, Springfield Road, Baildon.

THERE are rightly huge concerns at the proposed relaxations to the planning laws (Yorkshire Post, September 7), and one has to wonder whether the promised localism is already being shunted to one side.

Any relaxation of the rules for the green belt have to be totally unacceptable.

We then read that Communities Secretary Eric Pickles, when commenting on proposals to allow householders to build substantial extensions without requiring planning permission, stated: “We are expecting people to operate in a neighbourly fashion.”

Is this man living in the real world? Unfortunately too many people would not dream of 
doing so.

These proposals need to be resisted until better safeguards are put in place.

From: Geoffrey F Bryant, Queen Street, Barton-on-Humber.

WILL there ever be a right place?

I am very pleased when, as they do, Yorkshire people write to your paper and express their support for wind farms, incinerators, traveller sites, industrial developments, mining and house building, but how is it that these same people always consider that it is proposed to put these schemes in the wrong place? They must not be on hills, in valleys, in woods, beside the seaside/rivers/lakes, near to housing, near to schools, on green field sites and in particular not near my house.

T’was ever thus I suppose, but as a grandad becoming increasingly worried about the broken world my generation is bequeathing to its grandchildren could I plead that a more far-sighted approach be adopted?

We badly need a plan which will ensure that by 2050 (if not earlier) the world’s ever-increasing population has enough food, water, housing, schools, health care, jobs and energy and is not frying in forever rising world temperatures. Sadly I see no democratically-elected government ever winning an election on the necessary manifesto.

So, I say in the meantime let’s have a wind farm around Stonehenge and Fraisthorpe beach (Yorkshire Post, September) 7 if there is a chance that it might in some even small way enhance the quality of life of our descendants.

From: David M Adams, Huddersfield Road, Barnsley.

I FIND it extremely annoying when people accuse those who object to a proposed development of being Nimbies (not in my back yard). The latest proponents of this are David Cameron and George Osborne, both of whom I would suggest are the biggest hypocrites of all.

In fact, we are all Nimbies without exception. We all exist within our own undefined comfort zone or bubble and when this is violated we object.

The strength of our objection is determined by the level of intrusion into our lives or living space.

The installation of wind farms is a classic example of this, and so is the proposed development into the green belt.

This is guaranteed to cause great anxiety and irritation to those who are most affected by this policy. The word Nimby should be swept from the English Language since its use causes nothing but annoyance to those on the receiving end of this offensive allegation.