25/11/2012 Sunday Politics South West

In the South West: The Government announces plans for more windfarms

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2255 seconds

and more power stations and it says Hello. I'm Martyn Oates. Coming up

on the Sunday Politics in the South West. Should these fields in an

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty be covered with concrete? I'm

joined this week by Stephanie McWilliam, who was UKIP's candidate

in South East Cornwall at the last general election. And Gary Streeter,

the Conservative MP for South West Devon. A welcome both. The most

talked about vote last week took place not in the House of Commons

but a couple of streets away at Church House, where the General

Synod of the Church of England voted not to approve women bishops.

That's despite the fact that almost all the existing male bishops

support the idea. So do a lot of MPs, including our own Ben Bradshaw,

who tried to draw the Prime Minister into the row. Given that

the Church of England is the established Church, will he

consider what this Parliament can do to win sure that the

overwhelming well of members of the Church of England and this country

is respected? I will look carefully at what he says. But the Church has

its own processes and elections, hard for some obviously wonder

stand, and we have to respect individual institutions and their

decisions. Garrett, you are a Christian, do you think Parliament

should intervene? Not really. I am disappointed in the decision and

the Church of England risks making itself relevant in the 21st century

and most it a cannot understand this. Women should be bishops. They

need to reconsider. I don't want the newt Archbishop to get bogged

down with this but I hope you can find a short track to solve this

problem. The Church of England is established Church, created by

Parliament and is ultimately governed by Parliament. There is a

strong legal case? I suppose we could do it, we are sovereign. But

that would render their church in two. I hope they can resolve this

themselves. But I understand those who are against this, the biblical

authority, some poor people should not be a -- some people think women

should ultimately not be bishops. I interpret the scriptures in light

of current culture. It is time to think again. Stephanie, you believe

in the absolute sovereignty of Parliament? Should they not

exercise that? The is a difficult issue. I understand the argument

from 20 years ago, when it was about ordaining women priests. I

did not agree but I could understand what they were coming

from and I do not understand, if you have women priests, why not

bishops? They it was about safeguards. You could still have

people who were only subject to male bishops. But the head of the

Church is the Queen, who is a woman. She is the head of the Church. If

we have women priests and we have a woman as the head of the Church, I

don't understand. But it is a matter for the Church, because the

risk is that she will make a difficult situation a lot worse if

Parliament intervenes. Back to the mainstream politics! On Monday, the

Prime Minister said he was determined to make it easier to

build big infrastructure projects like incinerators, power stations

and windfarms. On Thursday the Government made a clear commitment

to more wind turbines and more nuclear power stations. Here in the

South West, the row over one big energy project is now entering its

third decade. John Danks reports. The people of St Dennis in Cornwall

didn't like the idea of an incinerator being built on their

doorstep. Campaigners challenged the decision to build it, taking

their case to the High Court in London, which found in their favour.

The Secretary of State appealed and the incinerator got the go-ahead.

So has this community's six-year fight come to an end? Not quite.

have not given up, no Sir. Until every stone has been unturned. No

doubt about that. On Tuesday they presented a new independent report

which they claim could make significant savings for the county

and offers a waste solution more reliant on sorting and recycling

than burying or burning. How can they possibly turn a blind eye to

the possible savings of �320 million over 20 years? At the end

of the day, the taxpayer will have something to say about that.

Earlier this week, David Cameron told a CBI conference he would like

to see fewer judicial reviews being granted where big infrastructure

projects were concerned. urgently need to get a group on

this and it will charge more for reviews so people think twice about

time-wasting and instead of giving up as cases up to four bytes of the

cherry, we will cut that in half. The Prime Minister isn't just

talking incinerators. He wants to simplify the planning of large and

sometimes controversial schemes which could include windfarms or

major road projects. The PM says the number of judicial reviews has

tripled in the last decade. Too many, he says, are completely

pointless. One South West solicitor told us the vast majority of last

year's planning judicial reviews ended in failure. 2000, 200 fell

into the other category, including planning and of this, 500 odd cases

got permission to bring their judicial review to the full hearing

and 87 of those decisions were found to be unlawful and were sent

back to the decision maker, who originally made this. But the MP

who backed his constituents fight in St Dennis doesn't want

safeguards in the planning process to be eroded. I have got a real

concern that we are in danger of restricting the community's

legitimate right to raise concerns about the decision-making process

and in many cases, the process can go as wrong as the decision and we

have to be careful that we allow local communities to be able to

mount challenges to decisions that they don't agree with or are

unwelcome. Cornwall Council told us they welcomed the Prime Minister's

proposals to reduce the number of judicial reviews where planning is

involved. In response to the alternative waste proposal, they

said it would take around nine years to form a new waste policy

involving more public consultation and cost around �90 million in

Isn't this trampling over local isn't? This will make no difference

to the planning and the ability to object. It won't change the right

of appeal. David Cameron is simply talking about the next level of

complaint, judicial review and these things have grown in the last

10 years, they are already expensive and we can get one after

another, even if helpless. That is what makes the difference? Not very

often. Even France, F building new railway lines through northern

France, it'll be done in two years. Here, it goes on for decades

because people have the right. France is the most centralised

state in Europe? But you have trains that run on time.

through localism? This isn't about incinerators, this is about high-

speed two. It does not really affect this region. It will affect

big scale projects and we haven't seen the details. Stephanie, you

kept his devoted to look and listen, what about the way the Government

is going about this? Some issues must be decided at a higher level.

Actually, when looking at defence and energy and security, but for

Cornwall, they should be a plan developed by Cornwall Council that

represents the interests of the people. And that force must be

heard. At the moment, we have the solution of localism but what we

have actually got his councillors hampered because they are told by

planning officers that they must accept this and cannot oppose that.

There is no point in them calling to committee for an application in

the wrong case. With incinerators, because that has gone on for so

long, you have complications in the decision-making process, for

example, when my father was on Cornwall Council, they argued about

an incinerator at St Denis. One of the concerns was the amount of road

traffic required to feed that to keep it working efficiently. Along

the way, we now have the incinerators going ahead in

Plymouth in South West Devon. Now, perhaps, there is the argument for

saying, the incinerator, if there must be one, and I don't have a

problem, we don't suppose incinerators Birsay, but it perhaps

should be further west. In 2010 you said you would have local

referendums for things like supermarkets, what about things

like incinerators? Yes. That is a dilemma. Nobody will say yes to an

incinerator and it to power station and lots of people will not say yes

to a wind farm. These things will not be built anywhere? You can get

people choices, you can have alternatives other than saying, we

are not having this. The alternative is, he will have no

energy, you will have no waste- disposal mechanism. That will

convince everybody else but but the people who will get the power

station because it is a planning issue. For energy security, these

things have to happen... National? He would not subject power stations

to this? We are looking at the National Energy security issue,

those decisions have to be taken at a higher level. Just to talk about

energy broadly, we know the broad bones of the Bill and it looks like

energy bills will go up substantially for people to pay for

more wind farms. That is controversial. Is that right?

don't think so, wind farms might already have had their day. In the

sense that we have a lot of them and they are producing a very small

amount of electricity in it renewable terms, a and I would much

prefer to see us investing in wave power and tidal power, offshore.

This could lead the country in that. And of course, some of that when

incentivise those new products but I don't want to see this country

full of wind turbines producing a very small amount of energy.

Government does. I am in the glorious position as a Conservative

backbencher of sometimes been able to criticise my own government.

Well backbenchers continued to put pressure on the Government to

change course? Yes, I don't want to keep a pretty wind farms and the

energy minister agrees. But not his bus? Or the Prime Minister.

should have won the last election outright. That would have been so

much better. You are completely opposed to wind, Stephanie. But you

would like to see more coal-fired power stations? Recording wind

turbines, it isn't about NIMBYs. I don't have a problem. I was on and

favour, initially, free energy... I started looking into that in more

detail and the more it unravels. They don't work. The on the way in

which they are efficient -- they are efficient is in transferring

wealth from the poor to the rich. Can use a wristy be recommending

further reliance on fossil fuels? - - can you seriously. It is running

out. There is plenty of reserves. We are in danger at having a very

serious problem with energy security in a knot too distant

future, particularly if be relied on wind turbines, wet the fact they

disrupt the National Grid, we don't have the infrastructure to cope

with that stop start nature. We have to have the back-up for when

there is no wind or when the wind blows too strongly. And they have

to be stopped because of safety. They don't work on any level. We

need an alternative. And we absolutely are dependent as a

society on cheaper energy, because too many jobs are going abroad.

There is a debate about that but that is another stage. We have to

leave it there. Sticking with planning, Cornwall Council is about

to consider plans for 48,000 new houses over the next 20 years. The

debate, as always, is about whether that's the right number and, if so,

where they are going to be built. As Tamsin Melville has been finding

out, planning applications are already underway in Areas of

Outstanding Natural Beauty. It's a view that would normally put

thousands on the price of a house. But not for the proud owner of this

affordable home in Flushing near Falmouth. Rebecca Bromley grew up

in the village and thought she was going to have to leave. There are

houses for rent in the area, not a massive amount. But for the price

they are renting, it would have been too expensive to stay. We

would have had to move out and move into one of the nearest towns.

is it meant you, being able to stay? Really good, and place.

Because I'm quite close to my family and it is nice and I wanted

my children to grow up where I did. Rebecca's house stands on what was

a so-called rural exception site, an area outside a village boundary

where planning permission wouldn't normally have been given. But with

around 27,000 people on a housing list in Cornwall, the council is

keen for sites like this to be used for affordable homes for local

people. All of this field. Basically, we are at the green

markings. And all of that field. But for Jan Robson in the nearby

village of Mylor Bridge, it's a worrying change. I don't even feel

we are being listened to now. is campaigning against a proposal

for 30 homes on this land opposite her house. As in Flushing, it's

outside the village boundary and in an Area of Outstanding Natural

Beauty. But here, a third would be sold on the open market. We have

got no argument about affordable housing but it would be nice if it

was done in smaller areas and developments and possibly,

hopefully, on brownfield sites rather than beautiful countryside.

Jan questions the accuracy of the council's housing register to

measure real local need. But the councillor in charge of housing in

Cornwall says growth in places like Mylor Bridge is the future. Being

an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty pushes up the house prices

and makes it difficult for local people to get their foot on the

housing ladder and these areas should be targeted. We do need to

deliver. There is in need in the area and people made to address

similar issues across Cornwall in the next 20 years. Cornwall Council

is in the process of finalising its local plan, which sets out how many

houses are needed and where they should be built over the next 20

years. A proposed target of around 48,000 new homes reduces by about

20,000 the figure set by the previous government. Despite this,

Councillor Kaczmarek expects some battles. We have groups of

opponents to housing across Cornwall which are all for it. They

oppose virtually every single housing scheme that has put forward.

Even affordable housing. Back in Flushing, Rebecca says people who

oppose developments like hers need to think again. Every place at the

is, the people against the housing, their house is on a piece of grass

and it is a failed, so I think inevitably it will all change and

things will have to progress and grow so that villages can thrive.

Cornwall's local plan will be decided by councillors in December,

with it due to go out for public consultation in January. Stephanie,

do you question best global number of houses required? Do if it did.

As a parish councillor, I've had a classic example. If we look at the

Housing Minister, we have one figure for the number of households

and the number of homes required and the updated the parish plan and

looked at what was required there. What was required was more open

market family homes for the parish and our property is suitable for

retirement for elderly people. What we have got his every application

is for affordable homes, two bedrooms and above, and one of the

other needs was for a one-bedroom properties. There is no match

between local need, the housing applications coming forward and we

are never going to get on top of this problem of the shortage unless

we deal with demand. It is no good addressing the supply. What you're

saying is, having looked at your manifesto, he seemed to think as a

party that the large amount of this extra housing need is from

immigrants. That is surely not the case in the south-west? We have a

limited amount of correct immigration but we also have a lot

of movement from other parts of the UK because the pressure on housing

there. A an address from Eastern Europe are driving wealthy people

in London to buy homes on the coast in Cornwall? This is what we get

into the problem, when you look at housing, you have issues that are

related that are connected... Interview, is this chain of events

true? No, I don't think emigration is a problem at all. But we do need

more houses in this area and there was a good point in that the plan

for how many houses should be bottom up. The old regional

strategy figures... Is that really what the Coalition is doing? Yes,

because actually there is more power for local the authorities to

come up with their own plans. that putting the thumbscrews on in

a different way? Not at all. I am not aware of that. They his

presumption of sustainable development. In Plymouth and the

South Hams, it is bottom up housing planning to meet the needs which

are clearly on the doorstep. We need more houses and affordable

houses and we jolly well have to get on with this. These figures

will be judged by the Government ultimately? That's right, you must

have control. Some authorities were built no houses at all. As the Hon

Lady just said in that piece. Every house is on a piece of land which

once was a green field. We need houses around the area, I know that

for certain. But the local authorities should determine how

many and where they should go. whether jobs are going to come from

to provide employment for those people. OK. We must leave it there.

Now our regular round-up of the political week in 60 seconds. A

week of flooding havoc. He said the canal was going to go and I said,

you are joking! And the bank just went. Whoosh! But still no deal

between the Government and the insurers to protect householders

beyond next summer. Meanwhile, are the floodgates to NHS regional pay

about to open? MPs from all parties fight on to keep them closed.

Wildlife groups warn that EU money to protect the environment could

soon be lost. The Prime Minister heads to Brussels to try to hold on

to it. As the Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset stands down,

Yeovil's MP says the new Police Commissioners should work hard to

make sure they don't lose top performers. And broadband bliss for

Devon and Somerset as the European Commission approves a super-fast

upgrade, just like Cornwall's. This flood deal was promised in June or

July originally. It is getting desperate? It's very important and

it's very complicated and it is desperate. More and more flooding

and the main thing we must do and the Government will do a deal with

insurance companies, I'm sure that will happen. But we must build no

more houses on flood plains and we still have not heard that lesson.

We absolutely... I agree about building and flood plains, why are

we not saying, firstly, brownfield sites must we used before any

agricultural land. Agricultural land isn't only required for food

production, it is also needed to absorb the rainfall. If we shall

have more extreme weather, would be not be better spending the money

that is going into subsidising wind turbines on flood relief schemes

and prevention, on mitigation for any changes. Quickly, wasn't the

idea that Police and Crime Commissioner has should be getting

Chief Constable to apply for their jobs immediately? Yes, each

individual commissioner will do what they think is right in their

locality and if any Chief Constable decides not to apply for the job,

that is a personal choice but over the medium term, this will involve