Sutton Coldfield 6,000-homes nod ‘flies in face of Government protection pledge’
BIRMINGHAM’S only Conservative MP has accused the Government of encouraging cynicism about politicians, by backing plans to build 6,000 homes on Sutton Coldfield’s green belt in breach of its own manifesto commitments.
Andrew Mitchell, the MP for Sutton Coldfield, attacked Communities Secretary Sajid Javid for allowing the building to go ahead – and said MPs would find it hard to trust Mr Javid in future.
The pair are former Government colleagues. Mr Mitchell was Chief Whip in the Conservative government when Mr Javid was Economic Secretary to the Treasury.
But in his current role as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Mr Javid has lifted a block on the Birmingham Development Plan, backed by Birmingham City Council, which will see a total of 50,000 new homes built.
Fields near the Sutton Coldfield bypass at Peddimore and Langley are due to have 6,000 homes, as well as accommodation for businesses.
A final decision on the scheme will be made by Birmingham City Council in January, but it passed a major hurdle when Government made it clear it will not stop the building going ahead.
Speaking to the Birmingham Post, Mr Mitchell said: “This drives a horse and cart through the Government’s commitment to localism, it suggests the Secretary of State is not to be trusted when he says his commitment to the green belt is sacrosanct, it contradicts the Conservative manifesto commitment to protect the green belt.
“For all those reasons, Parliament will not trust this Secretary of State on the green belt and will seek to tighten the law.”
Mr Mitchell accused Mr Javid, the MP for Bromsgrove, of contradicting both the 2015 Conservative manifesto and a promise he made to Parliament earlier this year. The manifesto included a pledge to “ensure local people have more control over planning and protect the green belt”.
And in July, Mr Javid told the House of Commons: “The green belt is absolutely sacrosanct. We have made that clear: it was in the Conservative party manifesto and that will not change. The green belt remains special. Unless there are very exceptional circumstances, we should not be carrying out any development on it.”
But in November, he revealed he had lifted a block on Birmingham’s green belt plans which had been imposed by his predecessor as Communities Secretary, Greg Clark. Speaking to the National House Building Council annual lunch, Mr Javid said: “They want to build homes for their children and grandchildren and Westminster politicians should not stand in the way of that. That’s why, earlier today, we lifted the central government hold on the Birmingham Local Plan.”
Mr Mitchell said: “Green belt is essential to the enjoyment and quality of life that my constituents quite rightly expect. And for a Secretary of State to one day say the green belt is sacrosanct and the next day to ride roughshod over the views of very large numbers of people is wrong in principle and it’s wrong in practice. It will rebound against the government. This is precisely why people are so cynical about politicians because they behave this way. And it will rebound against the Department because Members of Parliament will not trust the department on the green belt, because of the way Sutton Coldfield has been treated. The central issue here is that the 100,000 people who live in Sutton Coldfield, which is an ancient royal town, have been entirely locked out of the process by which these plans have been developed.
“Although we have had public meetings attended by thousands and marches across the green belt attended by hundreds of people, the people of Sutton Coldfield have not been heard.”
The Department for Communities and Local Government referred the Post to comments made by Sajid Javid in the House of Commons in November.
Mr Javid said: “Government placed a hold on the Birmingham local plan precisely because they value the green belt : it is very, very special. However, when a local community has come forward with a robust plan, has looked at all the alternatives, has considered its housing needs and has prioritised brownfield sites, and when the independent planning inspectorate has said that the plan conforms to all the rules and regulations, the Government have no valid reason to stand in the way.”
This is precisely why people are so cynical about politicians