A Public Inquiry and other curious tales!

The Cottingley Springs Public Inquiry finished this week

 The Cottingley Springs Public Inquiry finished yesterday after a 4 day hearing. The Inquiry follows a call in of Leeds City Councils planning proposals to expand Cottingley Springs by Eric Pickles which is their controversial plan to expand the already over large site in to the Green Belt. I have acted as advocate on behalf of local residents and the process has been a gruelling but most enlightening one!

Leeds City Councils case in brief is that they could not find any other site that could accommodate a small Travellers site of 12 pitches. This follows what they claim to be an extensive search of 214 sites in Leeds City Council ownership. It is beyond Hans Christian Anderson's Fairy Tales to believe that no other alternative site could be found across the whole Leeds City Council area but under further questioning Leeds City Councils case became clearer.

Both the Regeneration and Asset Management Officers confirmed the real position Leeds City Council have towards the Travelling Community by stating that Travellers had not been involved in any of the Regeneration Discussions and that the needs for more Travellers pitches was not incorporated into any Leeds City Council regeneration strategies. They went further to confirm that Developers perception of the introduction of a Travellers site anywhere in a regeneration zone would have a negative impact and reduce land values - even when they failed to evidence this view. The message was clear from the Council - not one site was available for a small Travellers site because it would have a negative impact on their wider plans.

This cannot be an acceptable way to resolve the problem of the lack of availability of Travellers Pitches across the City and expanding Cottingley Springs - which already has problems because of its size - will only make matters worse.

The big issue is the approach of Leeds City Council which is about placing a larger site in the same location of the City while doing their best to prevent sites that need regenerating from being used for a Traveller site! This curious position is one that sits badly with the Labour Party's view that it genuinely embraces everyone within the Peoples Party. The truth is somewhat different. The ruling Labour Group has had 214 alternative sites - many in Labour Wards - it could have used to provide a small Travellers site. A smaller site would satisfy new planning guidance at both local and national level and would be what most Travellers want. But Labour do their best to prevent their synthetic support for communities actually turning into action and use almost Fairy Tale approaches to prevent making a positive contribution to resolving the lack of Traveller pitches issue. Indeed at Sandon Mount in Hunslet the Comrades have managed to drag out a planning application for a small family site for almost 2 years with the three Labour Councillors and the local Labour MP objecting. So much for Labour solidarity!

I hope the Planning Inspector sees through the Councils Fairy Story like defence of the lack of any alternative sites across a City the size of Leeds. A refusal of Planning Permission for Cottingley Springs would be a good news story for all - including Travellers - as Leeds City Council would then have to adopt a realistic approach to identifying alternative sites which already exist, developing them quickly to reduce the problems all communities face with unauthorised sites.