Last year, a resident submitted a planning application to convert a very large garage with a pitched roof—which, in fairness, already looked like a small house—into an Airbnb. The local residents all opposed it, and it was quite rightly turned down. A quintessential English hamlet should not have its integrity spoiled by commercialism.
However, without any doubt, the local residents would also have opposed the garage being converted into a house for residential use. The classic English NIMBY (Not In My Backyard).
This is where I differ with them. Not only do we need more houses, but we desperately need to create the jobs to build them and start boosting our economy. Great Britain must begin embracing compromise, or we will fall behind the rest of Europe. Our services and welfare will suffer. While the liberal elite opposes progress, they fail to propose any solutions for how we are going to feed, clothe, and house a growing population.
Dare one say, Rachel Reeves is taking a leaf out of Donald Trump’s book.
The West, especially Britain, is bogged down with red tape, quangos, NIMBYism, bloated middle management, inefficiency, and anything else that stops progress. You name it, we’ve got it.
There must come a point where we embrace compromise if the country is to move forward. We seem to have descended into a culture where governments have pandered to all demands from all sorts of groups to placate the nation. The result? A sterile economy and a culture of inertia.
With his inauguration earlier this week, Trump came out fighting straight away with a raft of executive orders designed to shake up America, seemingly in a simple and straightforward way to make America great again. Some of these executive orders were absolutely dreadful, but I can understand the thinking behind them, albeit from a liberal perspective.
Personally, I don’t think America needs shaking up to the extent Trump wants. It has a booming economy and vast wealth for investment. They’ve already allocated half a billion pounds to grab the artificial intelligence crown, for instance.
We need some of that energy over here, and I was pleased to see Rachel Reeves, someone I don’t rate highly, who has foolishly boxed herself into a passive economy, actually come out fighting. It’s becoming clear she is prepared to face down NIMBYism and the liberal elite in an attempt to turbocharge the British economy through vast building projects.
Over the years, new policies and regulations have steadily mounted to hinder development, and these really need to be unraveled. Yes, if a building project is erected on your doorstep, you’re probably not going to be happy. But as many of these developments will primarily be in built-up areas, the impact will be less significant. Sensibly, she has announced that many developments will be near train stations, which will reduce the need for excessive parking and provide necessary transport links to employment. Presumably, if you buy a house next to a discarded piece of land you would assume something may be built on it in the future
Campaigners (NIMBYs) will face restrictions on continual legal challenges to planning decisions for large projects. High Court judges are being given further powers to clamp down on drawn out legal reviews concerning planning matters. A whole raft of measures is being introduced to help turbocharge national infrastructure growth and cut down on the barriers stopping it.
Reeves has come out fighting in the same week that Trump has ripped up the old order, essentially saying, “Let’s crack on and do this.” Reeves is right to take this approach.
Admittedly, the main reason for this push is that Reeves has left herself with no other options due to her self-imposed financial restrictions, meaning she cannot raise funds for further investment. But sensibly, this approach shifts investment to building companies, with the government reaping the rewards.
Although the Labour Party has been criticised for its financial decisions in its last budget, this is going down very well with businesses. The big building companies are overjoyed, and immensely wealthy corporations will now view Britain as an attractive place to invest, thanks to the removal of excessive red tape.
Yes, I sympathize with someone who is going to have a new housing estate appear on their doorstep. But the alternative is that this country will fall into disrepair. We need the money to rebuild the National Health Service, ensure vulnerable and older people in society are properly cared for, and support those who struggle to look after themselves. Liberals who oppose progress need to figure out an alternative way to achieve these goals, and let’s hope they’re magicians, because there isn’t another way.
The Rights of Fans. 