I READ recently in your paper that following a report by planning inspector, Richard Hollox, that Rotherham Council have been told they can no longer prioritise brownfield sites for housing and that they must add a further 3,000 homes to the local plan. He states that it is against government rules to maximise growth.
This coalition government was supposedly the greenest one yet and I have a letter from the Department for Communities and Local Government dated August 1, 2013 confirming the National Planning Policy Framework published in March 2012 states that local councils should take into account all the benefits of the best and most versatile farmland.
Bassingthorpe has been a farm since 1365 and still produces many tons of essential wheat. In view of the contradiction here I have asked our MP if she will table a question as to what in fact is Government policy and if the use of green belt by developers applies only to Rotherham.
Your paper informs us of the many thousands of Roma in the town. The television news stated that the Government had asked G4S to refrain from sending so many asylum seekers to the town. Are we to sacrifice our green belt to provide housing for an artificially created population explosion when jobs locally are so scarce?
Seven years ago Rotherham suffered terrible floods. In view of the past weeks and the fact that we are told by scientists that flooding situations are likely to be an ever more common occurrence, does it make sense to concrete over the green belt nearest to town thereby greatly increasing the flood risk? A fairer distribution of immigrants over the country as a whole would help.
Cath Hallam, Munsbrough Lane, Greasbrough