The last government ended up in a right pickle over planning policy. Rather than engage local communities, they dictated house building targets from Whitehall, saying that 11,000 new homes would be built in Camborne and Redruth alone. Power was taken away from local councils and transferred to unelected regional quangos which led to a huge public backlash.
The new government has done much to return powers to local people. Regional Spatial Strategies were abolished within days and Councils were invited to develop their own plans. One thousand pages of centralised policy guidance is being streamlined with more control given to local councils. To ensure that councils listen to their communities there are new powers to enable parish councils or other groups to design their own “neighbourhood plans” which, if supported in a referendum, will have legal status in planning law.
At the beginning of this year, Cornwall Council published a consultation document for its “core strategy” on planning between now and 2030. The number of new houses planned in Camborne and Redruth has almost been cut in half to around 300 houses per year and most of the focus is now on building on derelict brownfield sites. The plan is a major improvement on what went before but I still think there is room for further improvement and this was the topic of discussion at a recent meeting of the Trelawny Alliance in Camborne.
There is no doubt that we have a shortage of housing and every week I have people struggling to find a suitable home approach me for help. However, the government is pursuing a number of other policies that may ease the pressure on our existing housing stock and these should also be factored in. First, there is a new £100 million fund to bring empty homes back in to use. Secondly, changes to the way housing benefit is paid will encourage people who have a house bigger than their needs to downsize and make way for a young family. Finally, banks and building societies will now be forced to pay council tax on homes they repossess so they have a strong incentive to get homes occupied again.
One of the problems about the future is that it is difficult to predict. That is why I have argued for two key amendments to the plan for Camborne and Redruth. First, there should be a principle of building on brownfield before greenfield sites. Secondly, there should be a delay in developing any greenfield sites until a mid-term review has been completed in ten years time. That would be a chance to take stock and reassess housing need and it would ensure that developers don’t cherry pick easy to develop greenfield sites while leaving the old derelict sites in a mess.
George Eustice can be contacted on george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or at 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall, TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Thursday, 23 February 2012
Wednesday, 15 February 2012
Religion and Politics
“Never discuss religion or politics” is the timeless advice to those who want to avoid causing offence or controversy but occasionally something happens which means you have to discuss both at the same time. Last week, in an extraordinary judgement, Justice Ouseley ruled that Bideford Council had no legal right to hold prayers before council meetings.
The government immediately made clear that the decision was flawed and that provisions contained in the New Localism Act, which comes into force within weeks, will overrule the judgement because they give councils what is called a general power of competence. Rather than having to be given permission in law before being allowed to do something, as the judge in this case insisted they must, in future councils will be free to do anything they like provided it is not forbidden in law. That includes saying prayers if they want to.
Every day, both the House of Commons and House of Lords hold prayers before debates commence. It is a practice rightly repeated in council chambers up and down the country. Regardless of how religious individual MPs or councillors might be, prayers before parliament sits are a crucial recognition that we have our own independent Church of England established as part of the state with the Queen at its head. One of the crucial things about the British constitution is that it has evolved in a way that guarantees our absolute independence as a nation and an established church is part of that.
Britain has an admirable history of religious tolerance. Having an established Church of England does not mean that we oppose other faiths. A few years ago I worked with a project that aimed to improve links between the Conservative Party and the Muslim community. That year, I received more Christmas cards from Muslims than I did from Christians. Nor does it mean that religion is used in politics. The US does not have an established church like Britain but presidential candidates will frequently play the card of religion during elections to try to garner support in religious areas. That does not happen in Britain where we maintain a dignified separation of religion and party politics even though, or perhaps because, both parliament and the church swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen.
I sometimes receive letters from practicing Christians who feel that their beliefs and rights are being undermined. Parliament frequently has to wrestle with difficult issues where there is a clash of rights. But we are a Christian country and, while I am not devout myself and, like many others, don’t go to church as often as I should, I do think we should take a stand for the right to say prayers.
George Eustice can be contacted on george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or at 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall, TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
The government immediately made clear that the decision was flawed and that provisions contained in the New Localism Act, which comes into force within weeks, will overrule the judgement because they give councils what is called a general power of competence. Rather than having to be given permission in law before being allowed to do something, as the judge in this case insisted they must, in future councils will be free to do anything they like provided it is not forbidden in law. That includes saying prayers if they want to.
Every day, both the House of Commons and House of Lords hold prayers before debates commence. It is a practice rightly repeated in council chambers up and down the country. Regardless of how religious individual MPs or councillors might be, prayers before parliament sits are a crucial recognition that we have our own independent Church of England established as part of the state with the Queen at its head. One of the crucial things about the British constitution is that it has evolved in a way that guarantees our absolute independence as a nation and an established church is part of that.
Britain has an admirable history of religious tolerance. Having an established Church of England does not mean that we oppose other faiths. A few years ago I worked with a project that aimed to improve links between the Conservative Party and the Muslim community. That year, I received more Christmas cards from Muslims than I did from Christians. Nor does it mean that religion is used in politics. The US does not have an established church like Britain but presidential candidates will frequently play the card of religion during elections to try to garner support in religious areas. That does not happen in Britain where we maintain a dignified separation of religion and party politics even though, or perhaps because, both parliament and the church swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen.
I sometimes receive letters from practicing Christians who feel that their beliefs and rights are being undermined. Parliament frequently has to wrestle with difficult issues where there is a clash of rights. But we are a Christian country and, while I am not devout myself and, like many others, don’t go to church as often as I should, I do think we should take a stand for the right to say prayers.
George Eustice can be contacted on george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or at 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall, TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Thursday, 9 February 2012
"Go to town"
The West Briton and Cornishman are to be commended on their new “Go to town” campaign which aims to get people shopping in our towns again. There has been much debate about what can be done to save our town centres, but there is one simple truism, “use them or lose them” so we all have a role to play.
Two years ago I organised a local conference to discuss some of the issues. Conscious that such events are often attended primarily by councillors and local government officials, I walked through Camborne, Redruth and Hayle going in to shops to discuss their concerns.
Three key issues repeatedly came up. The first was that the term “town centre regeneration” had negative connotations for a large number of small retailers. This surprised me but the reason is that, all too often in the past, insufficient thought was given to the disruptive impact of one way systems, pedestrianisation schemes and the like. In Redruth, for example, the old County Council decided to resurface the car park gradually, in between other jobs. As a result, it took six months to sort out the main car park in the town, which had a hugely detrimental effect on trade. So we must apply the principle, “First, do no harm.”
The second major issue to come up was car parking. Most small retailers recognise that the single biggest reason they cannot compete with supermarkets is that supermarkets can offer free car parking. I always remember the managing director of one of our large retailers saying that if a survey is conducted of the public, they will say that they want a picture postcard high street with a fishmonger and a butcher, but when it comes to how they vote with their wallets, 97% do their grocery shopping at a supermarket because they want to open the boot, load everything in and go home. We need to consider the issue of parking and I want to see Cornwall Council using the new retained business rates the government is giving them to offer more free car parking.
The third issue was business rates. I think it is a crying shame to see small retailers and new business who take huge pride in their shops snuffed out because the rigidities of the business rate system means they go backwards, losing money month after month. I think we need to look at ways of making our business rate system much more flexible so that we can give more breaks to new businesses that are doing a good job and that, given the time, could achieve so much more and really bring new life to our towns.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Two years ago I organised a local conference to discuss some of the issues. Conscious that such events are often attended primarily by councillors and local government officials, I walked through Camborne, Redruth and Hayle going in to shops to discuss their concerns.
Three key issues repeatedly came up. The first was that the term “town centre regeneration” had negative connotations for a large number of small retailers. This surprised me but the reason is that, all too often in the past, insufficient thought was given to the disruptive impact of one way systems, pedestrianisation schemes and the like. In Redruth, for example, the old County Council decided to resurface the car park gradually, in between other jobs. As a result, it took six months to sort out the main car park in the town, which had a hugely detrimental effect on trade. So we must apply the principle, “First, do no harm.”
The second major issue to come up was car parking. Most small retailers recognise that the single biggest reason they cannot compete with supermarkets is that supermarkets can offer free car parking. I always remember the managing director of one of our large retailers saying that if a survey is conducted of the public, they will say that they want a picture postcard high street with a fishmonger and a butcher, but when it comes to how they vote with their wallets, 97% do their grocery shopping at a supermarket because they want to open the boot, load everything in and go home. We need to consider the issue of parking and I want to see Cornwall Council using the new retained business rates the government is giving them to offer more free car parking.
The third issue was business rates. I think it is a crying shame to see small retailers and new business who take huge pride in their shops snuffed out because the rigidities of the business rate system means they go backwards, losing money month after month. I think we need to look at ways of making our business rate system much more flexible so that we can give more breaks to new businesses that are doing a good job and that, given the time, could achieve so much more and really bring new life to our towns.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Thursday, 2 February 2012
Welfare Reform
This week the government’s welfare reform proposals came back to the House of Commons after a bumpy debate in the House of Lords. I think that dealing with the problem of welfare dependency is one of the most important priorities for the government because it’s one of the ways that you improve the life chances of the next generation. The evidence is clear that having a working role model in the family is one of the key determinants of a child’s life chances.
It is why I simply cannot understand why certain members of the House of Lords have objected to the idea of capping benefits at the average amount of money earned by working families. The proposal is to cap the total benefits that any one household can earn at £26,000 per year. That is still a lot of money, amounting £500 a week. It would be the equivalent income after tax of someone in a job being paid a salary of £35,000 per year. What sort of message does it send to people working hard to support their family, sometimes on the minimum wage, that there are other families who don’t work at all but who are taking home more money and living in a home that many working people could not afford? It may be controversial, but we need to start taking concrete steps to get the right incentives in the welfare system.
Another dispiriting problem I sometimes come across is where people tell me that they can only work, say, 16 hours a week because, if they do more than that they lose their various benefits and tax credits and end up worse off. It is not their fault, but something is wrong with the system. We need to make work pay. The government is planning to radically simplify our benefits system, merging many different types of benefit into one single Universal Credit where the support paid is tapered so that it will always pay to take a job, work longer hours and take a full time rather than part time job.
There are also moves to reform Housing Benefit which has been spiralling up in cost in recent years and in many instances has actually driven up rent levels in the private market making it even harder for people working to afford their own home. The reform aims to reduce rents at the lower end of the market by allowing councils to pay Housing Benefit directly to private landlords if those landlords agree to cut their rents. That means the landlords are given some security in return for accepting less money.
It is not easy delivering welfare reform against a backdrop of a difficult job market but it is important that we make a start, and alongside benefit changes give people the right support to get a job.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
It is why I simply cannot understand why certain members of the House of Lords have objected to the idea of capping benefits at the average amount of money earned by working families. The proposal is to cap the total benefits that any one household can earn at £26,000 per year. That is still a lot of money, amounting £500 a week. It would be the equivalent income after tax of someone in a job being paid a salary of £35,000 per year. What sort of message does it send to people working hard to support their family, sometimes on the minimum wage, that there are other families who don’t work at all but who are taking home more money and living in a home that many working people could not afford? It may be controversial, but we need to start taking concrete steps to get the right incentives in the welfare system.
Another dispiriting problem I sometimes come across is where people tell me that they can only work, say, 16 hours a week because, if they do more than that they lose their various benefits and tax credits and end up worse off. It is not their fault, but something is wrong with the system. We need to make work pay. The government is planning to radically simplify our benefits system, merging many different types of benefit into one single Universal Credit where the support paid is tapered so that it will always pay to take a job, work longer hours and take a full time rather than part time job.
There are also moves to reform Housing Benefit which has been spiralling up in cost in recent years and in many instances has actually driven up rent levels in the private market making it even harder for people working to afford their own home. The reform aims to reduce rents at the lower end of the market by allowing councils to pay Housing Benefit directly to private landlords if those landlords agree to cut their rents. That means the landlords are given some security in return for accepting less money.
It is not easy delivering welfare reform against a backdrop of a difficult job market but it is important that we make a start, and alongside benefit changes give people the right support to get a job.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Thursday, 26 January 2012
Marine Energy Park
I have been arguing for two years that if the country wants to generate electricity from the sea then they should build it where the waves are. This week, the government announced that Cornwall would be the location of the UK’s first Marine Energy Park. It’s an important achievement for Hayle because Wave Hub and the new industrial units currently under construction on the North Quay will be the crucial ingredient of this new industry.
About 25% of all the wave and tidal technology development in the world is happening in Britain and now Hayle is at the heart of it. Cornwall’s marine resource is second to none with a powerful Atlantic swell but not so powerful that the sea’s energy cannot be harnessed. It has been estimated that wave power could eventually meet 15% to 20% of Britain’s power needs producing enough electricity to power 11 million homes. There is also economic potential. If wave power succeeds, the industry could be worth £2 billion by 2050 creating more than 16,000 jobs. Some estimates suggest that the wave and tidal power industries together might provide as many as 10,000 jobs by as early as 2020.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. This will not happen overnight because it is an embryonic industry. There is no shortage of things that can go wrong and many obstacles remain. We now need to focus on the hard work of making this industry a success. Firstly, we need to get pioneering electricity generators to choose Cornwall and plug their wave devices into Wave Hub. We must ensure that there is financial support to help them through the research and development phase. That is why Hayle should have first call on the new £10 million development fund created by the government to progress wave power technologies.
Secondly, it is hard enough getting new industries off the ground without having bureaucratic burdens on top of everything else. So we need to be willing to simplify the myriad of risk assessments and licensing processes that so often kill good ideas before they can even begin. Finally, we need to link up the ground breaking academic work going on at the University at Tremough with the pioneers who will be developing devices at Hayle.
I have been concerned that in the last ten years, Scotland has been doing more to encourage this industry than the British government but that is now changing. Last year, the government increased the subsidy it pays to developers in Cornwall – so that they now match what is paid in Scotland. This latest decision to designate Cornwall as the first Marine Energy Park means that we have now overtaken Scotland as the UK’s leading centre for wave energy, so let’s make it a success.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
About 25% of all the wave and tidal technology development in the world is happening in Britain and now Hayle is at the heart of it. Cornwall’s marine resource is second to none with a powerful Atlantic swell but not so powerful that the sea’s energy cannot be harnessed. It has been estimated that wave power could eventually meet 15% to 20% of Britain’s power needs producing enough electricity to power 11 million homes. There is also economic potential. If wave power succeeds, the industry could be worth £2 billion by 2050 creating more than 16,000 jobs. Some estimates suggest that the wave and tidal power industries together might provide as many as 10,000 jobs by as early as 2020.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. This will not happen overnight because it is an embryonic industry. There is no shortage of things that can go wrong and many obstacles remain. We now need to focus on the hard work of making this industry a success. Firstly, we need to get pioneering electricity generators to choose Cornwall and plug their wave devices into Wave Hub. We must ensure that there is financial support to help them through the research and development phase. That is why Hayle should have first call on the new £10 million development fund created by the government to progress wave power technologies.
Secondly, it is hard enough getting new industries off the ground without having bureaucratic burdens on top of everything else. So we need to be willing to simplify the myriad of risk assessments and licensing processes that so often kill good ideas before they can even begin. Finally, we need to link up the ground breaking academic work going on at the University at Tremough with the pioneers who will be developing devices at Hayle.
I have been concerned that in the last ten years, Scotland has been doing more to encourage this industry than the British government but that is now changing. Last year, the government increased the subsidy it pays to developers in Cornwall – so that they now match what is paid in Scotland. This latest decision to designate Cornwall as the first Marine Energy Park means that we have now overtaken Scotland as the UK’s leading centre for wave energy, so let’s make it a success.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Wednesday, 25 January 2012
Regional Policy
It was Michael Heseltine who proved that government action could help create the conditions for economic revival in the regions with major successes in areas like Docklands in London and in Liverpool. There were even policies at the time to encourage major manufacturers like Pall in Redruth to invest in Cornwall.
A successful regional policy is incredibly important to the far South West because action is needed to create new industries and higher paid jobs. In the last decade, the UK has largely contracted out regional economic policy to the EU. There have undoubtedly been some successes, particularly in Cornwall. The new university at Tremough and high speed broadband to name just two examples.
However, some EU programmes have been restrictive and employers in some sectors complain that they are not considered fashionable enough to qualify for grants. We must also remember that there is no such thing as EU money. Since 2007, Britain has paid in £30 billion towards EU structural funds and received just £9 billion back. We simply get some of our own money back. Analysis by Open Europe concludes that if we repatriated regional policy to the UK government, Cornwall could receive an extra £207 million in funding over the next seven years.
Some say they prefer the devil they know and are frightened of change. But this is no time to bury our heads in the sand. The EU is a declining institution. The euro is no longer a viable currency and will face further tests this year. Some EU leaders have even said that the collapse of the euro would mean the end of the EU. I don’t think that will happen but the EU will face major cuts to its budget. Here in the South West, we need contingency plans to protect our economic interests.
One idea is to put all the extra funding that Britain would have if structural funds were repatriated into a second pillar of the Regional Growth Fund specifically targeted at areas like Cornwall but with less bureaucracy. It’s an interesting idea which could be right for the future.
ENDS
A successful regional policy is incredibly important to the far South West because action is needed to create new industries and higher paid jobs. In the last decade, the UK has largely contracted out regional economic policy to the EU. There have undoubtedly been some successes, particularly in Cornwall. The new university at Tremough and high speed broadband to name just two examples.
However, some EU programmes have been restrictive and employers in some sectors complain that they are not considered fashionable enough to qualify for grants. We must also remember that there is no such thing as EU money. Since 2007, Britain has paid in £30 billion towards EU structural funds and received just £9 billion back. We simply get some of our own money back. Analysis by Open Europe concludes that if we repatriated regional policy to the UK government, Cornwall could receive an extra £207 million in funding over the next seven years.
Some say they prefer the devil they know and are frightened of change. But this is no time to bury our heads in the sand. The EU is a declining institution. The euro is no longer a viable currency and will face further tests this year. Some EU leaders have even said that the collapse of the euro would mean the end of the EU. I don’t think that will happen but the EU will face major cuts to its budget. Here in the South West, we need contingency plans to protect our economic interests.
One idea is to put all the extra funding that Britain would have if structural funds were repatriated into a second pillar of the Regional Growth Fund specifically targeted at areas like Cornwall but with less bureaucracy. It’s an interesting idea which could be right for the future.
ENDS
Thursday, 19 January 2012
BBC
In difficult times, every organisation needs to think carefully about how much money it is spending and where it might be able to make savings. It is why last year the government made clear to the BBC that it expected it to freeze the TV Licence Fee for the next few years. I think this is important because families have a lot of pressures on their incomes and, in the current environment, it would not be fair to expect people to pay an even higher TV Licence Fee.
I have always been a supporter of the BBC. I actually think it is an important British institution. Sure, there are times when I can disagree with its coverage of certain political issues but I do think that BBC journalists make a genuine attempt to be impartial and the BBC certainly devotes time and resources to giving coverage to political issues and informing public debate in a way that is the envy of the rest of the world and which we should cherish. Our broadcasters, including the BBC, have an important role to play alongside a robust and questioning newspaper industry. Without the mass media providing a platform for local and national debate, public engagement would decline and democracy itself would be severely weakened.
But it is important that any savings are made in the right areas and that the BBC does not just pick on soft targets and cut services in areas which have less clout within the organisation and so struggle to get their voices heard. Last summer, the BBC published some draft proposals for the savings it would make and has been consulting on them ever since. I have been very concerned that local radio was being unfairly singled out for more than its fair share of cuts and have made this case to several senior policy makers within the BBC. The further you get from London, the more important both local newspapers and local radio become and Radio Cornwall has one of the strongest and most loyal audiences of any local radio station in the country.
The BBC is the largest broadcaster in the world. It employs 23,000 people and has a budget of over £3.5 billion. Of that budget, around £2.5 billion is spent of TV and just £600m on radio. Of that £600 million on radio, little more than £150 million is actually spent on all the local radio stations in the whole country. Radio Cornwall costs a fraction of the amount spent on Radio Wales. I think the BBC needs to find a way of putting money back in to the budget of local radio and instead find additional savings from its vast national TV budget. They could possibly start with some of the huge salaries paid to celebrity TV presenters.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
I have always been a supporter of the BBC. I actually think it is an important British institution. Sure, there are times when I can disagree with its coverage of certain political issues but I do think that BBC journalists make a genuine attempt to be impartial and the BBC certainly devotes time and resources to giving coverage to political issues and informing public debate in a way that is the envy of the rest of the world and which we should cherish. Our broadcasters, including the BBC, have an important role to play alongside a robust and questioning newspaper industry. Without the mass media providing a platform for local and national debate, public engagement would decline and democracy itself would be severely weakened.
But it is important that any savings are made in the right areas and that the BBC does not just pick on soft targets and cut services in areas which have less clout within the organisation and so struggle to get their voices heard. Last summer, the BBC published some draft proposals for the savings it would make and has been consulting on them ever since. I have been very concerned that local radio was being unfairly singled out for more than its fair share of cuts and have made this case to several senior policy makers within the BBC. The further you get from London, the more important both local newspapers and local radio become and Radio Cornwall has one of the strongest and most loyal audiences of any local radio station in the country.
The BBC is the largest broadcaster in the world. It employs 23,000 people and has a budget of over £3.5 billion. Of that budget, around £2.5 billion is spent of TV and just £600m on radio. Of that £600 million on radio, little more than £150 million is actually spent on all the local radio stations in the whole country. Radio Cornwall costs a fraction of the amount spent on Radio Wales. I think the BBC needs to find a way of putting money back in to the budget of local radio and instead find additional savings from its vast national TV budget. They could possibly start with some of the huge salaries paid to celebrity TV presenters.
George Eustice can be contacted at george.eustice.mp@parliament.uk or 1 Trevenson Street, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 8JD or by telephone on 020 72197032.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
