Redwood Report Will Test Cameron’s Green Credentials

17 August 2007

‘John Redwood’s Competitiveness Policy Review is confused and contradictory and, at its worst, a recipe for environmental degradation. David Cameron has said that protecting the environment is one of his key priorities. We therefore hope he will distance himself from the Redwood blueprint.’

This was the response of Ben Stafford, Head of Campaigns at CPRE [1], to today’s (Friday) publication of the report by John Redwood’s Policy Review on Economic Competitiveness [2].

Although the report ranges well beyond environmental policy, a number of its core recommendations would have damaging environmental consequences, including for England’s precious and threatened countryside. While the report nods towards environmental concerns, and makes some constructive proposals, all too often it argues for policies that would cause serious environmental damage. For example:

• it says that planning must be speeded up to provide greater certainty, potentially a recipe for the pursuit of economic development at the expense of wider sustainability considerations
• while making supportive statements about brownfield development, it also suggests that the ‘over-restrictive’ planning system is preventing development unnecessarily in many areas, and calls for new communities in sparsely populated areas. This could be read as a green light for greenfield development; [3]
• it bemoans the lack of motorway capacity in the UK, and argues for expansion of the road network, which would have damaging implications for both landscape and climate change, and fail to provide a long-term solution to congestion;
• the report supports damaging Government plans for new airport developments, although it is positive on the need for additional rail infrastructure, and public transport systems that are integrated with development.

Wholesale adoption of John Redwood’s proposals would constitute a decisive, and deeply worrying, step towards a presumption in favour of development, regardless of the wider consequences.

It could also set the stage for conflict between Mr Redwood and his former ministerial colleague John Gummer, who is chairing a Quality of Life Policy Review for Mr Cameron, expected to report in September. Although Mr Redwood’s report makes reference to Mr Gummer’s group, there is a danger of a serious ‘disconnect’ between the two processes, with Mr Gummer focusing on the environment while Mr Redwood champions economic development. The challenge of sustainability is to integrate these considerations.

Ben Stafford said: ‘David Cameron will struggle to convince voters that his interest in protecting the environment and sustainable development is genuine if he embraces Mr Redwood’s proposals wholesale.

‘We are hoping for a radical environmental prospectus from the Quality of Life Review, but it will amount to little if Mr Cameron plumps for Redwood over Gummer. It really is crunch time on the environment for the new Conservatives.’

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1. CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Bill Bryson. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen.

2. The report of the Conservative Party’s Policy Group on Economic Competitiveness is one of a number of reports commissioned by Conservative Leader David Cameron, which are reporting to the party during the autumn. They will help to shape the party’s manifesto for the next General Election. Mr Redwood’s report is, of course, simply a set of recommendations at this stage. The Shadow Cabinet will decide which of the recommendations of this and other Policy Groups form part of the Conservative manifesto. The full text of the report can be viewed at http://www.conservatives.com/pdf/ECPGcomplete.pdf

3. Page 74 of the report: ‘The whole premise of our planning system is based on the fallacy that land is a resource that requires draconian rationing. The reality is that 92% of our country is non-urban; and that a fraction of this land could satisfy our housing needs for years to come.’ Page 76: ‘This will require new communities to be formed in sparsely populated areas.’ CPRE strongly contests the analysis behind these statements, which could pave the way for a new wave of urban sprawl and loss of countryside, and will be publishing fresh research showing the extent of the impact of urbanisation in England in September.

---

Press releases, papers and documents published on this page are the intellectual property of an organisation unrelated to Central Lobby. We promote their parliamentary and political campaigning activities as they are subscribers to the Central Lobby service.

As such, Central Lobby does not edit, endorse, or attempt to balance the opinions expressed on this page. The content of press releases and other such types of content are the responsibility of the originating organisation.