Building Luton's future (in a more positive way)

Here's my letter in today's Luton News (original version - they changed it a bit) with some first thoughts on how to improve planning, which is causing so much hostility locally -- but could be something really constructive if we do it right.

Interested to hear your views:  joe@joehallforluton.com 

--------------------

"Planning" seems to have become a dirty word.  We have a deeply unpopular proposal for building homes West of Luton and another equally unpopular proposal for East of Luton.  (Not to mention the new sports centre in Stopsley!  I was there last Tuesday night and spoke to people angry about the plans.)  I wish it was simply a party political problem but they're all involved: Conservative Central Beds Council and Labour (previously Lib Dem) Luton Council.

So what would fix this situation?

I could be popular with some by simply campaigning against these developments, particularly building on the greenbelt.  But it's not that simple.  People in our town desperately need more and better housing.  It's clear there aren't simple, easy solutions: we have little space in Luton and we need to grow or in time we will wither away.  I recognise that our Council has a tough job on its hands.  

This is all the more reason we have to get it right.  Developments cannot be railroaded through.  If there are tough choices to be made, the people of Luton and the surrounding areas must feel that they play a genuine part in making them.  

The problems are systemic.  So we need a systemic change in the way local and national government are run in order to solve it.  A Tory government would simply give more power to the Council -- that's not the solution here.  The problem is people are at loggerheads when we need to be working together.  Four suggestions I have for a more constructive approach:

1.  We need to get the facts clear, end the myths and speculation.  According to the Council there are 1,200 empty homes or less in Luton (we need tens of thousands).  We need a reliable, independent figure for the potential of brownfield sites (but I'm not convinced they will be enough).

2.  We need real involvement of local people from step one  -- not a 'consultation' once divisive plans are already on the table.  If there's a case for building on greenfield sites, local people need to be part of that from the very beginning.  

3.  We need to keep regional planning -- but make it more accountable to local people.  Simply having Councils fight it out won't give us the right answers, it'll just lead to more arguments and party politics.

4.  We need a change in culture.  National government should offer incentives to Councils and regional planners to involve people more in planning processes and demonstrate real and constructive engagement.

We're talking about building the next generation of Luton's future.  We can't build it on bitterness and resentment -- we need to learn from the planning mistakes of the past decades in Luton.  We need the real involvement and buy-in of local people: it's our town and our future.

Don't mention the "p" word

Last Tuesday night I was forty feet up a wall in Stopsley.  This is not normally a situation I find myself in.  I'd been persuaded to try the climbing wall at the sports centre (this meant I did have a rope attached to me luckily).  "Wall climbing is the fastest growing sport in the UK," someone there told me.  Given that childhood obesity in Luton is a third above the national average, and adult obesity figures here not great either, we should be encouraging this and other sports as much as possible.  Climbing's also just a lot of fun (it helps if you don't look down!).

Crazy then to hear from one of the climbers that the Council's consultation meeting about the replacement sports centre they're building apparently won't have a climbing wall.  "That's just typical of this Council," he said.  Now I think there are undoubtedly a lot of good people, staff and Councillors, doing a lot of good work at the Council.  But it's abundantly clear that planning -- the "p" word that is inspiring so much anger locally when it comes to housing and more, isn't working for many Lutonians.  I set out last week to begin finding out more...

I started the week meeting a representative from the East of England Development Agency (EEDA).  You may not necessarily have heard of them, but they play a really important role in Luton's economic development.  They fund major projects to build the town and create jobs, including the Butterfield Green business park (where my brother has a small business) and the Carnival Arts Centre.

The lady from EEDA was very helpful and they clearly have a genuine interest in Luton.  But they are hampered by two things: as a regional body they're quite far removed from daily life in Luton, and they don't seem to have a strategy that targets places that need development most (I think there's a good case for prioritising Luton over Cambridge, which is doing well by itself).

You can do a lot to make them more accountable to local people -- our Council is supposed to be the bridge but I don't think that's enough (nor do I think the Tories' plans to simply get rid of regional authorities and give all the power to the Council would work either).  We need some kind of regional planning -- it's just daft not to have it, you can't do everything town by town with each Council fighting for their backyard, we'll never get anything done.  But we do need to change the regions: I don't think it makes sense for Luton to be lumped into the bottom corner of the East of England when we're different from towns like Cambridge and Peterborough and rural areas.

But these are bureaucratic changes.  What we really need is a change in culture in how planning and development is done.  It's got to be done with local people, for local people and by local people.  Planning should involve Lutonians from the beginning, spending should be much more accountable, publicly funded construction work should go to local firms wherever possible.  I believe it's possible to do this much better, to move from 'consultations' to really engaging local people, so people are part of planning not just when they feel they need to complain.

We also need a national and regional strategy that focuses on Luton, and places like it, that urgently need more development.  We have above average unemployment and parts of the town are still some of the most deprived in the country.  Not enough has been done by Labour and I don't believe in the Conservatives born-again conversion to "helping the poor".  We need to reverse the inequalities in our society that have grown under both the Tories and Labour -- in the twenty-first century, in a wealthy country like ours, no-one should be left behind.  Least of all Luton.  We will all benefit if more people in our town can prosper.  I'll be quizzing EEDA again this week about how much priority Luton is getting at their annual meeting... interesting to hear that amongst the many towns represented, no-one from Luton Borough Council has registered.

Up at the airport there was a more positive story about their plans for expansion and increasing numbers of jobs for people in Luton in the long-term (they're being hit by the recession right now, but are optimistic about coming out of it).  This is great news for us.  They also want to do it within the existing land they have and not build on the greenbelt, which is good news for everyone.  I need to find out more about how the expansion plans will affect local residents concerned about noise in particular.

Very interesting to hear a little-known local fact... the airport's revenue that goes to the Council (about £18m last year) basically pays for much of Luton's cultural programme.

We talked about the wider environmental cost of the airport too, an issue I feel strongly about.  They have been making some inroads to reducing the energy use of their buildings (which keeps costs down so it's good for everyone).  Their real focus is the impact of people travelling to/from the airport to catch their flight, which is two-thirds of their emissions (if you count the flights themselves separately).  In all of this, it was clear that more support is needed from government -- apparently it's dropped off, which is crazy.  That's the kind of forward-thinking planning (it's that word again!) that we should be doing.