Don’t develop the green belt until the pace of housebuilding improves

SIR – Simon Clarke (report, September 9) is right to identify the need for more housing, and his proposal to release green belt land close to stations could be part of the solution.

In isolation, however, it will achieve very little. There is no shortage of land with residential planning consent, and even in London around twice as many homes get approved as built each year. Without new incentives to speed up building, releasing more land will mostly add to the backlog of consents.

Nor will Mr Clarke’s proposal do much to reverse the decline of owner-occupation, which has little to do with housebuilding and much to do with the buy-to-let boom since the late Nineties. The key to improving access to home ownership lies in discouraging landlord investment; without this, no amount of housebuilding will be enough. Daniel Bentley Editorial Director, Civitas London SW1 SIR – Simon Clarke is right to be concerned by the Government’s failure to tackle the housing crisis, but claiming that the protected status of the green belt is the “central obstacle” is misguided.

The problem is affordability. Our recent report showed that building on green belt land will only entrench this: almost three quarters of the homes built on greenfield land within the green belt last year were unaffordable by the Government’s definition.

We recognise that some brownfield sites within the green belt could provide more housing. But what Mr Clarke fails to recognise is that building 1.5 million new homes on this land – brownfield or not – would also require new infrastructure, such as roads and schools. This would result in vast swathes of cherished countryside and farmland being destroyed for houses that young families are unlikely to be able to afford. Rebecca Pullinger Planning Campaigner, Campaign to Protect Rural England London SE1 SIR – The problem of housing is being considered from the wrong perspective.

We do not have a shortage of housing – we suffer from overpopulation. The size of Britain is finite, but its population of 66 million continues to rise.

In order to be able to support everyone, the number of people here needs to be kept in check. Stephen Lawrence Malvern, Worcestershire

SIR – William Moss (Letters, September 9) equates the green belt with “empty space”. He ignores the fact that this empty space is required for growing food. There have been warnings from the farming industry that Britain is not capable of being self-sufficient in the event of global food shortages. Given the threat presented by climate change, preserving our agricultural land is essential. Derek Coggrave London N3