The beginning of the end for eco-towns?

John

And why on earth would you not support those marchers, given that the whole idea is lunatic? I live not far from one of the proposed monstrosities: part of it is meant to be built on the green belt, indeed on sensitive marshland (very environmentally-friendly, that), with little local water (ditto), hugely overstretched local transport infrastructure (ditto), and the list goes on. It is in conflict with the existing regional plan, drawn up over many years by people with decades of local knowledge, specifically in conflict with the existing expansion plans of nearby towns. It is obvious that the government means to bulldoze this through against all existing planning regulations and procedures - the ZanuLabour idea of 'democracy'. Other than megalomaniac ZanuLabour appartchiks, why would anyone support it?

Fergus Pickering

My wife tells me that the main reason for building these things is to increase the value of Min of Defence land that Gordon can then flog. Anything in it?

Verity

Good news. Things are crumbling.

Puncheon

Labour loves to repeat past mistakes, like all idiots. This is the folly of 1950's new towns all over again.

Chuck Unsworth

@ Fergus Pickering

Take a long hard look at barracks closures (e.g. those in London) and see what has happened to the site values. None of the resultant cash has been returned to MoD's budget, of course.

Then take a good look at what is happening to Magistrate's Courts, and while you're at it you might want to see what's happening with hospitals and schools. These public assets are being flogged off at knock-down rates to plug the huge financial black holes.

This is all about the profligate spending which has now come home to roost in a big way. The Treasury is doing anything it can to deal with the chronic shortfall in public finances.

It's a short term solution to what is going to be a very long term problem.

Max Kaye

Here in the West Midlands, the only supporters of the local 'Ego Town' are the developers and the government as represented by the very un-fragrant Flint person.

Absolutely no-one without a political or financial vested interest want them.

Perry, sad at plans for yet more deliberate despoliation.

Above comments pretty well draw the strands together. Nonsensical, impractical, expensive, + social ‘experimentation’, - all urged on by nicely salaried quangocrats.

It’s sure-fire Noo-Lie-Bore material, and therefore bound to be driven through hell-fire by the Beloved & Supreme Leader.

The genius Prescott, Bliar’s no 2, will be pleased, - I assume the plans were conceived in his fertile skull.

But another ghastly mess for someone to unpick in the next government.

Nicholas

Very bad idea from a very bad government, being driven by Frau Flint's big mouth. Now we know why the centralised planning polit . . er . . quango was pushed through.

Yet more targets and tractor production, Herr Braun? I see you have already accused the counter-revolutionaries who dared to protest of seeking to deprive young couples and families of affordable homes. Nothing like a bit of propaganda, emotional blackmail and scare-mongering from Der Fuhrer, eh?

Of course nothing to do with the dogs breakfast you have made of the economy, the housing market or the millions of uncontrolled immigrants your party connived to let into the country.

Steve

I think Puncheon is bang on the nail here. Whilst I am not entirely against building new towns, you have got to get it absolutely right, and somehow regardless of the reasons aims etc, I don't think loads of greenfield settlements in the middle of nowhere is going to be the answer. I can remember when a sizeable chunk of my relatives where moved from Liverpool as part of slum clearance in the 60's and they ended up in the new town of Skelmersdale. Skem was just a horrible, horrible dump in the middle of nowhere. The newly built town centre rapidly decayed, until all it contained (near enough) was a dole office, off licence and pub. I can't help feeling that towns are where they are for economic reasons and wax and wane according to economic rationale. If you get the location wrong, you are merely building tomorrows slums today.

cuffleyburgers

This whle project had more to do with a)gerrymandering tory constituencies and b) buying some extra jobs/boosting the economy with tax payers' money.

It is obvious that if there were any genuine rationale behind the project they would have kicked off with a pilot project to test the concept, work out the costings and start to sell the idea. Then with a properly developed specification and clear costings, the thing could have been launched properly.

cosmic

I like the idea that by prefixing some useless, expensive scheme 'Eco' it makes it OK. It reminds me of a line Private Eye had around 1980 of renaming anything useless as 'Talbot'. They could name one of the towns 'Talbot'.

Presumably these eco-towns will be powered entirely by windmills, and that's why there are plans to put up 7000 of them.

It all fits together; joined up government at its best.

Paul B

Steve is right, houses & towns will be built where houses and towns are needed - the market will decide- not Stalinesque planning.

Steve Charlish

Thanks for the applause I was there and it was a great day out we achieved a lot that day meeting shadow housing Minister Grant Shapps and the Fuhrers mate Caroline Flint. The big debate and lesson here is not eco towns but the complete lack of Democracy, Transparency and provision of Information, in other words top down dicatorship. Decisions being made behind closed doors,cosy relationships between developers and Government Departments and all being forced on to communities. If you ignore the Eco Towns policy it is simply wrong to force things through in this way it smacks of Pre war Germany or perhaps Pol Pot would be a better comparison as he forced huge amounts of the population to work in the countryside as indeed much of the Eco Towns proposals are based on placement into rural communities. We are basically fighting a much bigger foe than the Eco Towns policy and that is Democracy, we need to stand up to this example of absurd dictatorship there is a lot at stake here. Ms Flint throws affordable homes and homeless as an argument back at campaigners 'we must here there voice'. Local councils have been hearing those voices for years and are willing to work with the government on such issues but they starve them of crucial funding and then are critical about council house provision or affordable home provision, often blaming the Tories, who have little or no control over National Government purse strings. Towns are grown organically they take a long time to develop, this is not the way forward. Sustainable Eco Urban extensions yes this will work.