Member

I have heard at first hand and in the Daily Telegraph about threats with menaces of compulsory purchase for those who do not follow the developers’ line, emboldened as it is by the availability of NSIP. I attended a public consultation event in July for the East Pye proposal, close to me, where I uncovered a surprising statistic—albeit the display boards told a different story, which time does not permit me to develop. In that proposal, in the developer’s own agricultural land classification, hidden away at the back of binder 10 of 13, I calculated that the total land area in the best and most versatile category represented 86% of the entire proposal. Further, 12% represented productive land—grade 3b. Only a negligible 3% was in what one might call the poorest two categories. I drew attention to my calculation and to some factually incorrect statements on the display boards, and the developer’s representatives were surly and dismissive. It was only when I declared my interest as a Member of your Lordships’ House that they conceded that a full correction and reconsultation may be necessary. My subsequent letters seeking clarification and confirmation have gone unanswered.