Battle to cut home targets

TARGETS to build thousands of new homes across the Westcountry come under fire from campaigners and MPs today amid growing concern at the countryside being concreted over.

A Labour-dominated Commons committee is warning that greenfield sites could be bulldozed unnecessarily unless the Government revises its housebuilding targets in light of the economic downturn.

And in a separate report also published today, the Campaign to Protect Rural England claims "significant swathes" of countryside will be lost if Whitehall imposes huge housing targets.

The regional spatial strategy – the controversial planning blueprint for the South West – has proposed some 200,000 new homes in Devon and Cornwall by 2026.

The plans form part of Gordon Brown's flagship pledge to build three million more properties nationwide to ease the housing crisis.

But with the mortgage market ground to a halt and building firms downing tools, opponents of the plans believe the looming recession could provide a chance for the numbers to be slashed.

The Environmental Audit Committee wants ministers to overhaul the targets to refocus on the environmental impact of large-scale development. If not, greenfield land could be ploughed up by developers to build homes that will not sell during the downturn, warns the committee.

Chairman Tim Yeo said: "Government targets for housebuilding are intended to make homes more affordable by increasing supply. But these ambitious targets were agreed in a time of economic optimism and easy credit. This is an opportunity for the Government to place environmental concerns at the heart both of targets and planning regulations for new housing.

"Once greenfield land is released for development, this land will be lost forever."

The committee also calls on the Government to investigate the potential of redeveloping empty buildings to create up to 1.2 million new homes.

The CPRE warns that across the wider South West, just half of the planned 30,000 new homes to be built every year will be on brownfield, or previously developed, sites.

It warns that the remainder will be built on greenfield sites, trashing the countryside.

Senior regional policy officer Fiona Howie said: "We do need more homes, but they should be delivered in a way that will not damage the environment and people's quality of life."

The PM's three million homes target needed to be reassessed in light of the "current economic climate and the implications of such high levels of development for the green belt, the wider countryside and the achievement of emission reduction targets".

She added that open countryside needed to be "more highly valued and protected".

Julia Goldsworthy, Lib-Dem communities spokesman, accused ministers of being "obsessed with centralised control despite paying lip service to localism", adding: "This whole process is dictated by Whitehall mandarins who have barely visited the areas in question and ignore the concerns raised by thousands across the country.

"The Government must scrap these unpopular and unrealistic central targets and let people have a real say on the future of their local area."

The South West Regional Development Agency has also raised concerns, warning the Government against removing the aim of becoming a leading region in tackling climate change. RDA chief executive Jane Henderson said the economic conditions must not stifle ambitions for going green.

Last week, newly-appointed housing minister Margaret Beckett, said the three million figure was "an aspiration, not a target" and agreed to a request from St Ives MP Andrew George to look at how the slowdown in the economy might affect the level of housing need.

Mrs Beckett said: "No-one should be in any doubt of our commitment to greener homes and to cutting carbon emissions. We have shown we can build the homes that are needed while protecting the environment, green spaces, and preventing urban sprawl.

"Now is not the time to scale back on long-term ambitions because of current economic difficulties. We need to be ready for the recovery.

"Those who argue against more homes need to seriously think about the future consequences for families on waiting lists, or those living in overcrowded homes, or struggling to get on to the housing ladder."