02/10/2011 The Politics Show South East

Green campaigners see red all over a possible relaxation of planning

laws on green belt or land. Are the Conservatives are planning to pick

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2149 seconds

If coming up in the next 20 minutes it - green campaigners see red over

the relaxation of planning laws. Art Conservatives appearing to pit

development above core vote. immediate impact could be concerned

considerable, if people see their government is responsible for

making these radical changes which they would see would be for the

worse. And it is David Cameron second-bottom conference as a

Conservative Prime Minister. How is he feeling in the Conservative

heartland. It is not often you find staunch Conservatives in the

party's heartlands getting upset about their ministers' policies,

but the plans put forward by Greg Clark, the Planning Minister and

Tunbridge Wells MP, to relax planning laws have got a lot of

them very worked up. Opponents, which include the National Trust,

say the new policy will allow houses to be built on greenbelt

land here in the South East. The government argues the change will

kick start the economy and provide much needed homes. But are

Conservative ministers prepared to lose support from their core voters

in order to push through their plans? We will be asking the

Sevenoaks MP and deputy chairman of the Conservative Party Michael

Fallon in a moment. First, Helen Drew reports. The Garden of England

- that is how Ken it is widely known and how many of the county

resident sea area. It is no surprise they are prepared to go

into battle over the Government's planning reforms. It may come to

the extent that some Conservative voters stop voting blue in order to

protect their land. There is a plan to grant planning permission across

certain areas of Green Belt. When developers patent applications, the

date default position will be to say yes, so we could see a lot more

houses springing up around a or countryside. The Government say

this is designed to help people get on the property ladder for the

first time. He owned five acres of land here. We Jewett be tempted to

sell it to developers? Well, if someone was going to get me

millions of pounds, of course they would consider it. But what the

needs to happen is that the law needs to protect the people from in

this instance, people like me. I am very unhappy about this and I think

the Government needs to rethink this. It will have a serious effect

on the way of life for people here. The default in favour of

development means only those with special exemption will be able to

refuse plans. One of these - the National Trust has looked at the

plans and is very concerned. He can see behind me the other areas that

are not protected and they could be up for grabs. It will mean that

those areas that have previously remained beautiful and a place

where people can used for recreation and other rural

enterprises will actually be up for grabs for development and the local

people will not be able to do anything about it. That is going to

make a massive impact on our work countryside. A in this country pub,

locals were enjoying beautiful views over the countryside. It

these plans go through far more building on greenfield sites, can

you imagine more building and a beautiful place like this? Where

else would you find such a view? came joy this lovely scenery

absolutely not. It is great that we have got this and we should

treasure it. It is part of England's heritage. It is important

that we do not overdo this. It is important that we do not spoil all

or green-belt site. So has Kent lost the countryside? It largely

vote Conservative, so we'll try to boost the economy, are the in

danger of alienating their heart wind fought? - - their heart land

what? There is not the solid case of people voting Conservative here

since the early days of time. It is very volatile here and it will have

an impact on the vote at both counsel and Parliamentary level.

people could have a look at the proposals and see how this proposal

was going to work, the may be less worried. At the moment, they have a

notion that the Government is changing planning laws which will

only be in the interests of development. If this policy is

designed to boost the economy at the risk of losing the heart one

vote, it is not worth it. Government recently misjudged the

mood of the land as regards the selling-off of would land areas.

But it may well be appear this is one battle the do not want to lose,

even at the cost of core voters. Helen Drew reporting. Joining us

now is the Sevenoaks MP and deputy chairman of the Conservative Party,

Michael Fallon. Your party members are really unhappy about this,

aren't they? I think they have been upset by some of the myths that

have been put about. Green Belt areas and areas of natural beauty

will not be affected. What's all this will rest on it is having a

good local plan. Under the old system, Ministers decided by your

council had to build 3,000 houses a year or what ever it was. It will

now be harder for developers to get through that. For firstly, you

mentioned the Green Belt. The clause that is upsetting people is

that there is an exception for villages with limited affordable

housing. That describes Wordsley every village in Kent, Sussex and

Surrey? You can get affordable housing built on Green Belt areas

at the moment. That has not changed. Let us face it, we need to make

sure we have affordable housing in the future for the children of the

people who are living just now. But we are intent on protecting areas

of natural beauty. He see local councils could drop their on plant

and then developers would come along and not be able to touch it.

But the Conservative estimate is that two-thirds of Conservative

councils are not ready to deal with this when it is made lot. He is, it

is a fair point that they have not got the plans in place now. But we

are consulting in changing the paperwork and they will need a

couple of years to get local plans in place. Even if there was going

to be a radical change in the number of planning applications

that could get through, that would not start for a couple of years.

That would give the council's time to get this in place. But once they

have got this in place and decided how many houses they want, it will

be harder for developers to get through. The consultation is due to

end in October. A year trying to rush this true? Well, we cannot

really women the situation. If we took her time over it, people and

we would be accused of being too indecisive. Are you surprised by

how strongly how the likes of the Daily Telegraph Telegraph, a

traditional Conservative paper, has started a huge campaign against it?

No, in the likes of Sevenoaks it is the major issue, possibly the most

important one. But in the past, if development was turned down, it

just went to appeal and the developers would win an appeal

against the council. Development is a big issue in the South East. It

is a very sensitive issue. More asked of us would agree that we

need more below cost homes. But it is the way the argument is being

put forward that is the problem. You are having difficulty

persuading people about this are you? Yes, it is something that we

have to deal with. The revised wording will be different and there

is time for local councils to get cracking and draw up plans. But

across the country, we're not just talking about attractive

countryside and Green Belt in Kent, across the country been need to

make sure there is land for sensible development for affordable

homes and offices that we need. are these core voters we saw in

that film worth upsetting in order to kick-start the economy? The will,

we all this they do not want to lose any voters. But this will

simplify the system and will put local people more in charge.

sounds as if you may be willing to lose some votes for this? This is

causing problems. It is not going away. How do we resolve this?

it will affect every town and village and we want a balance

between simplifying the local system and putting the local

council in charge and protecting what we all hold dear, which is the

Green Belt and the areas of natural beauty. It is a balance. That is

what we're going to work on. Changes in planning law may well

encourage growth, but what about changes to the tax system? Finding

a tax which is cheap to collect, hard to avoid and does not

discourage people from earning more would surely be a good idea. Step

forward the Land Value Tax, a way of taxing wealth - the land people

own - instead of their income. The LVT has traditionally been

perceived as a socialist policy, but this week a Conservative MP

argued that it would be a very sensible solution to our economic

difficulties. So is it an idea whose time has come? Michael Fallon

is still here and David Wetzel from the Labour Land Campaign joins us

in the studio. Mr Wetzel, for those new to the concept of a Land Value

Tax, how would it work? It works on the principle that all land was

originally provided three and land is there for people to use an by

taxing land values, we are sharing the land wealth, the rental value

of will. It is ironic listening to the earlier discussion is that one

of the reasons there is such pressure and the countryside in the

South East is because we are not using the land in the North of this

country. If we had the land value Tex and reduced other taxes on

wages, income tax, reduce taxes like VAT, the businesses would

deign to want to go talk in the North of England and we would see

more use of regional airports and we would not need to build on the

countryside. The that is probably not an argument that is selling

itself to the Conservative MP in the south. I you completely

disagreeing with this question mark no, I am not completely against

this. Where I do agree with this it is that there are people sitting on

land and it is important that the simplifying the land system is

brought in. It is just about how to do it. I am not sure a new tax is

the way to do it. What impact could it have in the South East? People

holding buildings or were used because over time they make a

profit - empty buildings - and sites. In London, there is to bomb

sites that still have not been built on. If owners want to get an

income from these sites, they will have to do something with them.

There is that Joe is that it would help - - not help elderly people

and the likes of farmers. In the likes of Australia, the exempted a

percentage of this from that. is what one named P said. He said

if you exempted the elderly people and farmers, it could be a workable

problem. If you look any new tax, you have to look at other people

there could then get caught up in it. I think we both want to see

into development and we need to make planning simpler. Firstly,

people simply need to know where they stand. The value of London

property has shot up in recent years and there is nothing holding

them back from developing. problem is that they will make

money from somebody else selling it on. They have tried to tax

development value it and that stops development. It keeps the place

idol. If you bring in this tax, it pushes the system a long-standing

encourages development. Vince Cable said this might work and he has

talked about a mansion tanks. If the 50 p tax rate was scrapped,

what you'd would you be happy with as an alternative? If you're going

to do something for the wealthiest, you have to make sure that they are

also carrying a fair burden of revenue that you're bringing in.

Clamping down on tax avoidance is one of the ways you could do that.

Doing all that stuff is extremely important. We will certainly look

at these things. The aim here is common. We do not want people just

sitting on land and it not been used. The Institute of Fiscal

Studies looked at for four years at a or system and recommended an

introduction of Land Value Tax. Frankie both very much.

The economy and, in particular, growth will no doubt be discussed

at length at the Conservative Party Conference in Manchester this week.

It is David Cameron's second autumn conference as Prime Minister and he

will want to show that the Coalition is making progress, but

also appease his backbenchers. Our political editor Louise Stewart

joins me now. It is not just backbenchers. A lot of Conservative

people in the South East and are very unhappy about this. I was

quite surprised to hear Michael Fallon there. He all but admitted

that they are struggling to sell this. I think there could be a

change in the language after the consultation period in October. At

the moment, you asked him is it worth risking core voters, but we

have not dissuaded them yet. It is clear that they have not won this

argument. Last year, it appeared that Ed Miliband was may be trying

to appeal to the left of the party, which might leave the more floating

middle ground area. Is David Cameron going to try an appeal to

that? He is troubled by the fact that many people still see the

Conservative Party as the nasty party. What is not helpful is that

the liberals tend to grab the higher ground on softer issues.

What can we expect to hear from David Cameron this week? I think we

will hear about riots, rights and responsibilities. David Cameron

will be giving the message that you cannot get something for nothing.

He will want to talk about immigration, crime, all the things

that play it well in the Harland and the things that they think the

Conservative Party moved away from at the last election.

Louise will be blogging and tweeting from the Conservative