Councils who wish to keep green spaces free from development

I was reading an article called "More Homes and Taxes Threat for Medway" over at the Medway Council Conservative Group website.

I'm sure they wouldn't mind me giving them a little plug and quoting as follows from their story:

"Minister for the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Ruth Kelly MP, has issued what amounts to a veiled financial threat to Medway Council and South Eastern Councils by stating in a Whitehall report that councils who do not build enough homes may miss out on ‘financial incentives’.

"The release, which is now thought to be a veiled threat to raise taxes on councils who wish to keep green spaces free form development..."

I'll stop there. That's an interesting statement "a veiled threat to raise taxes on councils who wish to keep green spaces free from development..."

I'm all for keeping green spaces free from development, especially within our towns, where open space is a valuable commodity. I personally believe that any area that can be utilised by the local community for their own use should be protected. In fact, I know of a green space in Rochester East that should definitely be kept free from development. It's the only open space left there and it's even used by school kids as a nature reserve.

Oh no - too late. The Tories sold the land behind Compass Close for £5.5m.

It's okay. I'm sure the residents were correctly consulted and their objections listened to. There is even a government paper that should have helped, giving recommendations on the preserving and providing of urban green spaces.

They have the support of their MP as well. Bob Marshall Andrews in a letter to Rodney Chambers, the leader of the council, wrote: "Rather than developing these green areas attention should be paid to reducing the excessive number of abandoned habitable homes in Medway and seeking the development of brownfield sites first, to which the Government has handed a considerable contribution."

But no. It was the £5.5m towards reducing the £8m blackhole in the council's finances that was the important factor - not the concerns of the residents who campaigned with their Labour councillors Nick Bowler and Teresa Murray against the development.

And where was the council's desire to keep green spaces free? There are plenty of brownfield sites throughout the Medway Towns that could have easily been developed. But that wouldn't have netted £5.5m. So despite the best efforts of the residents and councillors there will now be 135 houses and flats where open land used to be.

Perhaps we shouldn't rule out the decision behind selling the land was actually a crafty tax avoidance scheme. What better way to deal with a "veiled threat to tax councils who wish to keep green spaces free from development" than to flog off the green spaces in question.

Before I go though. Rodney when you say: "the New Labour government is advocating that as many as 40,000 homes a year must be built in our region" please check out George Osborne's change of heart on house building in the South East.*

Go here to find out about the Labour Group's campaign to save the land.

* Yes, you've guessed it - it's another Tory U-turn.