that our priorities should remain in the field of macro-economic structure. We learnt many years ago that to rely on other countries to do our manufacturing for us not only reduced our own employment base but also left us well and truly up the creek when those manufacturers imploded, and the supplies dried up. The disaster that is now China has been a hard lesson for us and our European partners, and that story still has some way to run. Fortunately for us the resilience and imagination of the ordinary people in our country has helped us to weather the various storms. It is my view that we should now repay the trust they have shown in our Modern Parliament and come up with practical, well costed and controllable development plans.
You will see from the briefing paper that a number of MP’s have tabled specific proposals and I will now hand over to the first of these, the member for Yorkshire East, Joan Brampton.’
The Speaker called for Joan Brampton, the member for Yorkshire East, which, like many, was a new constituency mapped to include an average number of constituents. Joan lived in Malton, a market town under the North York Moors, but had her constituency office in York, the largest centre of population.
‘Good morning ladies and gentlemen. I’d like to start the ball rolling with a plea for the rural economy. As with all rural areas of widespread, but small, centres of population poorly connected with public transport East Yorkshire has greatly suffered through the inexorable rise in the cost of fuel and the lack of local employment. At the same time we have suffered from the reduction of financial support for hill farming. My constituents are accepting of the reasons for their difficulties but would now like to see policies enacted that could help them. On behalf of my constituents I would like to propose changes to Planning and Landowning legislation that, I think, will go some way to addressing some of the core problems that prevent a sensible realignment of the rural economy.
Despite the problems of the last two decades, it still remains true that a quarter of resources, such as land and property, of our Country rest in the hands of one percent of the population. In East Yorkshire this is most clearly demonstrated by the vast privately owned estates, unchanged for hundreds of years, that dot the landscape. These Estates add much to our lives, they give work to local people, they guarantee the stunning landscapes that tourists enjoy and they provide a link with our heritage. On the other hand their very presence distorts the local economy. The sheer size of their landholding squeezes the population and, coupled with regressive planning regulation and a second-home economy, leaves the native population struggling to keep its place. My proposition is that special provision should be made for populations that can show a connection to a rural area.
One of the problems is that housing, and housing costs, are too great for the relatively low-waged rural workers. Although house prices have reduced somewhat over the last decade it is still true that, nationally, the average cost of a home is around one hundred and fifty thousand pounds. In my constituency it is even greater, with the holiday home effect. Rental costs are related to the value of property. At the same time a farm worker can only expect to earn about twenty thousand pounds a year. We all know the story. Young families either stay and live in poverty or leave their roots and head for an easier life elsewhere. Many, of course, live in tied houses, or have inherited, and lead relatively idyllic lives. We mustn’t forget that. It’s not all bad news and there are many out there who do not wish things to change.
My proposal is to introduce a requirement for landowners to release under-used sections of their land to an agency, established by parliament, charged with distributing this land to qualifying local people. In my proposal the land will remain under the ownership of the original landowner, who will receive a rent based on the land’s agricultural value only. In most cases this rental will actually represent a net financial benefit for the landowner. The second part of my proposal addresses planning regulations.
For many years now the Planning and Building Regulations have required certain standards of construction and insulation. At a time when we were told ‘The problem is NOW, global warming is happening NOW’ we introduced legislation that effectively meant that every new home built would add hugely to CO2 emissions with only a vague promise that this CO2 investment would be paid back after fifty years with the improved efficiency of each new home. Worldwide, the building of new, efficient, homes has hugely increased the damage we have done to our environment. At the same time the extra cost of building-in this ‘efficiency’ has maintained inflated house prices at a time when we may otherwise have expected market forces to reduce them.
For some of us, the recent history, and by recent I mean the last two hundred years, of housebuilding has been an anomaly. We went from a tradition of building homes from whatever materials were available locally to a system of mass production of building materials that would be moved around the country to wherever there was a need. For cities this system is still appropriate but I would argue that there are many rural areas that have local resources sufficient for a new approach to the traditional methods.
I propose that, subject to a number of provisions, qualifying families be allowed to build their own homes with reference to a special set of regulations. The essential requirement will be that each home achieves carbon neutrality within five years. This requirement will be ensured by a number of restrictions imposed on the construction. For example, cement products will be effectively banned, except for small details where no alternative is available and ninety percent by weight of each home must be sourced from within thirty miles of the site. Fuel for space heating must be available from the same catchment and the whole plan for construction and use must be signed off by the statutory body responsible.
I further propose that the country supports this construction effort by providing cheap finance, to be repaid as an affordable mortgage of a scale appropriate to the normal rural income levels.
I further propose that limitations be placed on the onward sale of these homes to ensure that they never become part of the ‘normal’ housing stock.
I would welcome questions on my proposal.’
‘Angus McGregor, member for the Western Isles,’ called the Speaker in response to the raising of dozens of hands in the chamber.
‘Thank you Mr. Speaker.
The people of the Western Isles have, perhaps more than any other region, been at the hands of landowners over the centuries. Not long ago our houses were being burnt by these landlords to force us off the land. We hold no great love in our hearts for these people. On the other hand my descendants lived in small cottages made from whatever was available in the landscape and, while they might have been perfectly lovely in the few short weeks we call summer, they were hell on earth for the rest of the year. Is the lady proposing that we return to living in a barn with our animals to keep us warm? Myself, I prefer my cosy modern bungalow with double glazing and a reliable supply of electricity thank you very much.’
‘Joan Brampton’.
Thank you Mr. Speaker. In my view the Western Isles represents the ideal environment for my proposal. Of course I’m not proposing that we compromise the quality of life of any homeowner. It’s my view that a period of research, perhaps a competition open to the public, can describe building methods that, coupled with the best of modern technology, will ensure a high quality build. This is not about going back to the stone age. It is about taking a practical and cost-efficient approach. I would also like to point out how Mr McGregor’s constituents can benefit greatly from this proposal. There is a simple calculation to be made. If, by introducing this new plan, overall housing costs can be reduced by fifty percent, as my calculations suggest, then that either eases the strain on household income, allowing families to spend on other things, or allows those families to stay on the Islands who would otherwise depart. It also means that new businesses which may be created can become viable much more quickly, without the pressing need for an entrepreneur to earn a substantial