‘Power for the people’ (From Worcester News)
Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting WN NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
‘Power for the people’
7:10pm Saturday 16th March 2013 in News By Tom Edwards
PLANS: Coun Simon Geraghty.
PEOPLE in Worcester now have the power to come up with their own blueprints for how the city should develop – despite concerns it could waste time and money.
Under the Localism Act, householders now have the ability to develop their own ‘local plans’ so they can choose where they want new shops, homes, parks and offices to go. But the city council’s leader has urged caution on the idea – and admitted he does not want to be swamped with endless requests from the public.
Councillor Simon Geraghty has insisted the authority’s work on the South Worcestershire Development Plan (SWDP) could be put in danger if households are intent on taking advantage of the new legislation.
“To be honest, I would not encourage people to create their own neighbourhood plans,” he said.
“We’ve got our own plan in place and have benefited a lot from cross boundary work in south Worcestershire.
“Under the Localism Act we must have a process in place for if and when people do approach us with an interest in this, but our plan for south Worcestershire is a much better approach than a whole series of pepper-pot plans in place – I don’t think communities will benefit from that.”
Under the guidance, resident-created neighbourhood plans could work in exactly the same way as the SWDP – as a tool for approving or rejecting planning applications. But each one would need to go to a referendum before it could be accepted, which would be hosted by the city council and require at least 51 per cent approval.
An in-house council report says developing just one neighbourhood plan could cost anywhere from £17,000 to £200,000, depending on the extent of land covered.
The authority has set aside £50,000 as a precaution, in case it is contacted by interested groups, despite outlining the concerns.
Councillor Roger Knight, the cabinet member for cleaner and greener, said: “I’ve got concerns over this too, mainly on the timing - I don’t think it’s a good idea in a period of austerity. If there was a high take up, it could cost a lot of money and we could end up with some expensive red herrings.”
The Government says the Localism Act is aimed at increasing public pride and interest in their neighbourhoods and giving people a bigger say in civic affairs.
Comments(8)
laidback
says...
7:54am Sun 17 Mar 13
Landy44
says...
9:38am Sun 17 Mar 13
The tail needs to stop wagging the dog here!
Lew Smoralz
says...
12:03pm Sun 17 Mar 13
This exposes how this council have been ignoring the ratepayers and adopting their own agendas.
For example, I have never heard anybody support the policy of filling the heart of the city with taxis. This is not only immoral, having kicked the disabled out to make it happen, but it is against the wishes of the majority of its citizens.
It is now certain that a lot of 'local plans' will be submitted, and if only the council had listened to the public instead of dictating to the public, then this would not have resulted.
bmoc55
says...
5:12pm Sun 17 Mar 13
Critics of the Council will see this as an opportunity to propose "mad cap" ideas, only fit for the bin. I think the Council should closely monitor the situation and cancel the plan if the proposals reach unsustainable levels
Not a good idea.
i-cycle
says...
7:02pm Sun 17 Mar 13
However...his comments only serve to expose the 'Pickle' the Coalition Government's 'Localism Act has created.
It pretends to offer residents the freedom to plan for their local areas. The reality is a wasteful sham as the local Council is likely to ignore anything that doesn't fit with what they've already decided.
At the same time the Government's new National Planning Framework has made it easier for landowners and developers to push through their proposals whilst making Councils much weaker to resist applications that will cause longer term damage to our local communities.
Despite its flaws elected councillors, advised by their officers, are or should be much better placed to balance the many, complex and complicated issues involved in planning for our local neighbourhoods.
It would be much better and cheaper if we all took our democratic rights more seriously and used our vote to hold local councillors to account and forced them to listen. The Council should also be more open to consulting and responding to what its electorate have to say.
However, back in the real world, I'm still waiting for even the decency of a response to rational suggestions I've made to a rather more 'remote' and unresponsive County Council.
I do wonder if the County Council had a third of its councillors up for election each year (like the City Council) whether it would make them more accountable.
This year you have the opportunity to make your own 'Localism Act'.
Get out and vote in the County Council elections on 2nd May for whoever you think will best serve your and your communities best interests at a local (not national or european) level.
dulon
says...
10:47am Mon 18 Mar 13
When it comes to policy and a development plan it needs to be assessed by unbiased professionals without a political axe to grind and presented to the electorate . That is democracy . However if a labour council decides that the development should take place in a safe tory or visaversa area then there is a certain amount of politicking to be dealt with .
In my opinion we local parish councillors have been given the opportunity to come up with a parish plan that has to be adopted by the local council . This is then taken into consideration by the local council when making decisions .
As an aside I do not believe that there
are any academic qualifications necessary to be a local councillor . The person concerned may be totally out of their depth when making decisions involving peoples lives and welfare and maybe only act upon ideological principals .....that is democracy.
Landy44
says...
7:12pm Tue 19 Mar 13
i-cycle
says...
7:48pm Tue 19 Mar 13
You should be a politician.
You are obviously so well equipped.
In fact with you in power we wouldn't need a democracy.
I'm sure you'd resolve all our complex problems single handed. Overnight.
That way we'd save billions on a useless system.
Financial problems caused by those wonderfully experienced bankers in the City would magically disappear.
Meanwhile back in the real world...
Comment now! Register or sign in below.
Log in with us
Fields marked with * are mandatory.
Or
Log in with