Underlying issues of the housing debate

12:13pm Thursday 1st May 2008

Comments (1)   Have your say »

WITH feelings of Salisbury residents running high at the moment about the vast number of new houses to be built in and around this city during the next 18 years, I believe that we should look at the bigger picture as well and the government's overall intentions.

To request such a large amount of houses to be built during the next 18 years is surely to far exceed what is necessary?

It is also not clear as to whether this is in addition to the amount of houses that would have been built naturally during the course of time or if this is the total.

If this is in addition to the normal house building plans then we should ask who is going to live in these houses? The overall effect and what I believe is the ultimate goal, is to flood the market with a vast number of houses.

We all know what happens when there is more available than what we need and that is the price will come down. I think that this is the government's true intention, to remove the "north-south divide", devalue the properties in the south and create what would be an economical disaster.

There are a vast number of brown field sites further north yet the government seems to prefer to build on our green field sites.

This legacy that the government has handed down will affect the whole of the south of England, including London.

Further evidence of my theory is that Salisbury does seem to have more than its fair share of the number of houses at 12,400. Could this possibly be because Salisbury is one of the most expensive places to live this far from London?
ANN HUTCHINGS, Firsdown

• I DIDN'T know whether to laugh or cry when I read the letter from Hugh Francis in lasts week's Journal.

From all the recent publicity, everyone should know that the number of proposed homes for our area was not issued by the government's agency until March this year.

It is untrue and unfair to say that Salisbury District Council and the parish councils were dilatory in giving out information; publicity was given about the SLHAA and the Core Strategy document, but no one really sat up and took notice until the numbers were made public.

I imagine most villages are in the same position with a hardcore of a few very committed, hard working volunteers who support everything going to keep the village spirit alive.

In Whiteparish, there are core organisations - the parish council, the church council, the Village Hall Committee and the Memorial Ground Trust. All of these are often desperate for new members and are always looking for support for their efforts at their annual meetings. Where are the villagers then?

The parish council has repeatedly asked for volunteers to prepare a design statement for the village, but, until now, no one has bothered to come forward.

I sincerely hope that the new-found public spirit continues and the organisations I have mentioned can look forward to better support in the future.
SUSAN KING, Whiteparish