25/03/2012 Sunday Politics South East

And in the south-east... Are a multi-million-pound budget boost

for the body charged with getting businesses to grow. For but how

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1825 seconds

I'm Natalie Graham and this is the Sunday Politics in the South East.

Coming up in the next 20 minutes... Reckless or responsible? The

councils which are set to defy national housing targets and

downsize their plans to build new homes.

Joining me in the studio today is Gareth Johnson, Conservative MP for

Dartford, and leader of Hastings Borough Council, Jeremy Birch.

There's been lots of discussion about roads in our region this week.

The Bexhill link road was given Government funding in the Budget.

The Chancellor also mentioned another Thames crossing in East

London. We also heard that the A27 is costing the Sussex economy �2

billion a year because of congestion. One would you welcome

another crossing? We need to see what happens once

week removes that all books on the Dartford Crossing. We do not know

what effect that would have on traffic flows. That will happen in

2013. Then we would get a better idea of exactly what is needed. It

is going to come down to where the extra crossing is going to be.

Decisions like that have got to be made with the consultation of the

local population. The local councils have said they

want the tolls abolished for the duration of the Olympics. We do

that and that? That Mrs the wider point, that we should be removing

the tolls completely. -- that Mrs. We're getting the next best thing.

We're seeing that all broods removed from 2013. A London

congestion Charge system will levied at the other motorists.

How much difference will a small road make to your area?

It makes a difference to the people that live on Bexhill road. It is

the biggest single carriageway in East Sussex. There is also an air

quality issue down there as well. But it opens up the possibility for

North Bexhill, of which is right next to Hastings. 1000 new homes

and 2000 new jobs. From a regeneration body, it is a major

scheme. With rising prices and increased

demand for housing in the South East, you'd think councils would be

rushing to build as many new homes as possible. But that doesn't seem

to be the case. When the new Localism Bill comes into effect,

local authorities will be given the power to decide how much housing

they want to construct. Surprisingly, some of them will be

choosing to build fewer homes than the current legislation demands.

Katie Inman has this report. This village in the mid- Sussex is

just one of hundreds of towns and villages across the region that are

facing the prospect of more development. Currently, there are

70 houses here, but there are plans to build up to 90 more. One local

resident could see 30 of those new houses built at the bottom of his

garden. Last Monday, we had a meeting at the parish council. It

was the most aggressive thing I have ever seen. Emotions and

tensions were running extremely high. There was great antipathy

running towards the parish council, the are seen as an opponent. They

are purely putting forward this proposal that someone else has

brought to them, the landowner. In terms of all the campaigning that I

and others have been doing, I have not yet met one person in the

village who wants this. previous Labour Government

estimates that 650,000 new homes would be to be built here in the

south-east. Consuls were set targets in a document called the

South East plan, which set out how many new homes they will build each

year. But the coalition Government has changed all that and wants

local councils to decide how many homes should be built. As a result,

some of them are scaling back on what the Labour Government demanded.

Mid- Sussex District Council is one of the authorities considering

reducing its annual house building target. Instead of building up to

850 new homes here as set out in the south-east plan, they want to

reduce that number by one third, building just over 500 new homes

here instead. The leader of the council says their own figures are

more realistic and reasonable. is not for us to question whether

the South East plan numbers were right or wrong, but for Mid-Sussex,

17,000 was to hide. We have done our own assessment which comes to

10,600. 10,600 is still a high level of housing. One countryside

campaigner has welcomed the fact that some councils could now be

building fewer houses. If they have applied due diligence, they have

weighed up all of the factors that determine the requirement for

housing in their area and in their view, they come up with a lower

figure. Then, that is democracy. It is a process that professional

planners should be doing. We would support them. We asked every

council in the south-east but they were planning to do with their

targets. Nine said they would keep the bigger the same, seven said

they were still in the process of deciding, but six councils told us

they may reduce the figure for its. Any changes would still need to be

approved by Government planning inspector. It could mean that far

fewer homes are built here in the south-east. It would increase the

her population... Are there are plans to build thousands of new

homes just North of awesome. Local residents have come together to

fight the scale of the proposal. do not want this. No one seems to

be convinced that politicians will deliver what they say. David

Cameron went on country file back in January saying he had no sooner

put his own family at risk than could the countryside or green

fields at risk. But if you talk to the local council, as we have, they

are saying they're getting a very different message. That needs

clarity. Consuls told us they wanted to reduce their own building

targets because of concerns over the environment and infrastructure.

For them, it will reduce what they see as the unsustainable over

development of their areas. From our studio in Southampton we

have Warren Finney, the South East manager for the National Housing

Federation. You don't want to see house building slow down, but

that's clearly what's going to happen?

What the National Housing Federation wants to see is the

right number of homes built for the right number of people. We have, on

average, currently about 100,000 homes being built across the

country. But about 250,000 new house will form. In the last number

of years, not enough homes have been built and the south-east. We

have over 225,000 households on housing waiting lists, which is a

huge number of people who simply can't get access to the tides of

homes they need. Are you worried about the Localism

Bill? I am worried that we will not get

the right number of homes. We need local authorities to be very robust

about their plans. They need to make sure that they assess the

housing needs, the economic needs and the prosperity growth over the

next 10 to 15 years. You're not unnecessarily worried if

the council decides to reduce the target from the south-east one?

If they have robust plan that says that is what they need. The concern

is when they are not taking a robust approach. That is where we

will see housing numbers fall and there will be serious pressures on

the local housing market. We will see more and more families and has

told sleeping on Four's -- floors and sofas.

Do you think the Government was expecting councils to increase

their targets or decrease them? I think what it is doing is very

much in tune with its localism theme. There are not going to have

centralised targets, it is about local areas and local people

through the local plan, through the neighbourhood plans, assessing what

is needed local beef. Do you think that is the right

thing? Do you think the Government should be giving councils that

responsibility? It is what the Government is doing

through localism. As long as local authorities are proactive in having

a robust approach, it is not a problem. The problem comes and we

do not have that reassessment of what is needed and we do not try

and meet it. Is there any indication about --

that a robust approach has not been followed?

It is too early to tell. We have not seen enough examinations about

local plans to know whether be a meeting true lead -- true need.

That the average house price is 12 times the average salary in this

region. Will building more houses necessarily solve that problem?

It is fair to say that numbers are not the only answer. Numbers are

absolutely important, but the average house price in the south-

east is upwards of �290,000. In some areas and the south-east,

you're looking at over 19 times the average salary. Clearly, we have a

real housing issue and lending is not at the level we might need. We

need to address all those issues. That is not only about numbers, but

it is about having the right numbers in the right places.

They argue. I know this is the current problem that you Council

has directly tried to solve by lending money. What else you trying

to do to encourage more housing for those that need it?

We are not reducing our targets. I think you reducing them slightly,

are due? We are sticking roughly around so

the figure. I can remember the detailed discussions we had in

developing the site these plans. It was based on what is a housing need,

or what is the population growth, what is the likely growth in

household, because with increasing numbers of single person households,

especially as people live longer, you get a greater demand of homes

even outstripping the increase in population. But the other thing we

were trying to grapple with is that is if -- gave the south-east is

going to be a buoyant economy, it will require more homes to cater

for the staff we will need to cater for her -- to make sure the economy

stays buoyant. You have to make sure you have a convincing evidence

base and a robust approach. You have to think what you economy

needs in 20 years' time, then we assume the recessions they have

finished on the economy may be booming. How many people do you

need a living in your area to provide the fodder for the economy?

It sounds like you are generally supportive of the Localism Bill in

that regard. The worry is that this new Bill will mean far fewer houses

when you really need them. There is nothing wrong in wanting

to protect the green spaces. The beauty of the Localism Bill is that

it actually empowers local communities to protect their local

areas. House building has increased since the election. Not as much as

we would like it to. But it is about to decrease.

will have to wait and see if that is true.

We are breeding in various different initiatives which will

help encouraged developers to build homes and encourage councils to

give planning permission for developers to build new homes.

We're also trying to ensure that first-time buyers are able to get

their deposits. If the councils aren't building the

homes that they were, the spill will call its problems in this

region. There is no lack of planning

permission being granted. Click across the Thames Gateway, there

are 12,000 new homes being made. In many areas, it is not a case of the

council's not saying you can have a new home, but for too long, will be

have had the central targets which have led local communities to

believe that there been imposed upon by central Government and that

has led to a lack of outbuildings. I don't know what you make of that.

We have heard from a council leader. What you think?

The south-east has been renowned for many years as the engine room

of the country from an economic perspective. The reason why that is

is because we have the wide range of employees that employers can get

access to. If we lose that to the wrong type of housing or even not

enough housing, that will have a real detrimental effect. It is

vital that we have the right number of phones and that local

authorities meet local need. As long as local authorities to plan

appropriately and have a thorough plan, then why these should not

have a problem. It is when local authorities shy away from those

responsibilities. A thank you.

At the end of this week, the South East England Development Agency

closes its doors for good and its place will be filled by a Local

Enterprise Partnership. The South East LEP is getting �46 million

from the government to promote new business in the region and has

already secured two enterprise zones, including one in Sandwich,

since it was set up in 2010. But critics say the organisation, which

covers Kent, East Sussex and Essex, is too large to be effective and

therefore suffers from some of the same problems as its predecessor.

So will it be a business saviour or an ineffectual quango?

Jeremy Birch, you're well placed to answer this question because you're

a member of the LEP and were a member of SEEDA. How will the new

organisation spend this �46 million?

We have just had our first proper meeting and we are discussing their

distribution of the growing places fund. It is currently �33 million.

It is meant to be a recycling fund. It is actually a loan to the

development project, which then repays into the pot, so the local

enterprise parties could lend it again. Where are you going to lend

it? There are about 12 projects that have been given the green

light. A couple are in Dartford. Across the region in Essex as well.

A good news for Dartford, then? It is. One of the first meetings

took place today. It has to be a good idea to bring local

authorities and business leaders together to try and actually get a

private sector robust response to growth improved in this area. If

you taking issues like the Thames estuary Airport, it is exactly the

sort of thing that the South East LEP looks at to see if there for

rhetoric instead. It is right that we have local authorities and

businesses looking at those regional issues.

We had that under SEEDA. Is this going to be better or more

efficient? I mourn the demise of SEEDA and

SVRs it was a very effective organisation. The local enterprise

partnerships are here and we will make them work as best we can. But

funding is nothing like Though of funding that the regional

development agency had. The Regional Development Agency has a

substantial number of staff who can go into towns and the south-east

and work with us and discuss their businesses can improve and develop

a regional strategy, all the things that the Local Enterprise

Partnership a lot of their capacity to do. We're going to make it work.

It has not got anything like the resource that SEEDA has.

Do you think you could regenerate the Thames Gateway?

That was part of the problem with SEEDA. It created a tour of

bureaucracy that has -- had been very costly. We have got a far more

streamlined system. Hopefully, it'll be far more effective than

SEEDA. It was very unaccountable. In terms of specific projects, or

one of them is that the Thames Gateway regeneration will be

completed. You think it is realistic?

I think there will be a big help for that area, because the Thames

Gateway area covers North Kent and Essex as well. That is one of the

reasons why we have the South East LEP at the size that the days. We

have businesses looking at the opportunities that exist across the

entire south-east area. It is time for a round-up of the

Chancellor's Budget speech and the implications for our region.

With the big story of the because the budget. Campaigners were happy

but the MPs welcomed the confirmation of the Bexhill link

road. He is something that the time in the community has waited for for

over 10 years. Finally, it has been confirmed and but go-ahead. It is

great for the economic growth in the area. And the Chancellor used

his speech to point to what could be a potentially huge

infrastructure projects. This country must confront at the

lack of airport capacity in the south-east of England. That came

just days after the Prime Minister made a speech calling for bold

action and saying an estuary airport would be considered.

will be bringing forward option in our aviation strategy, of which

will include an examination of the pros and cons of an aviation

Airport and the Thames estuary. we will have to wait until

Transport Secretary publishes the findings of her Aviation Review in

the summer to see if the plans, which critics call pie-in-the-sky,

ever actually take off. We just heard the Prime Minister and

Chancellor say been should really look at this estuary airport.

What you think? It is right to have a look at it.

We do have a lack of airport capacity in the south-east. But I

think the wrong option would be to have an airport situated in the

Thames estuary for environmental and logistical reasons. The cost

would be enormous. Think about their jobs. The boost the economy!

We would rearrange for the jobs are. What we need to do is look at other

options, existing options, that we have, whether that is Manston

airport or elsewhere. I would like to see those options looked at very

carefully. Don't get me wrong, I want to see jobs coming into the

area, but I think an airport in the Thames estuary would be an

environmental disaster. You mentioned that the South East

LEP would have to take give you miss. What you think about ba

silent? The South East LEP will be taking a

view. It is looking in the aviation capacity in the south-east. Boris

Ireland is some way away from the and we are looking much more to

Gatwick from a local point of view. Another runway there? After 26,

then the opportunity would be there for a second runway. I think that

could make a significant impact to the East of our region and there

has to be a debate nationally about whether the whole of London and the

south-east needs another hub airport. But we think Gatwick has a

lot of potential. Thank you.