opendemocracy.net: "Localism: a case of old friends re-united?"

"Looking at a set of recent planning outcomes across England: it’s clear that the localism agenda hasn’t tipped the balance in favour of grassroots communities. The same old names keep cropping up."

Link to web site

"... Our old friends in LB Barnet are still at it. They and their development partners, Barratt Metropolitan, have served Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) on the entire West Hendon community to make way for 2,000 new flats. Barratt Metropolitan and the council told a recent public inquiry that the orders were necessary, because it was 'unlikely' they could acquire the properties 'within a reasonable timescale' otherwise. They also claimed that the CPOs were 'in the public interest'. 

"The proposed clearances were 'critical' to West Hendon, as the area would 'benefit from additional spending power' from people moving into the new homes. Back in 2002, the council balloted residents on the scheme, and 75% were in favour. But a lot's changed since then.

"... Dan Knowles, a consultant speaking for local tenants, asked if a more recent ballot would have been similar to the one in 2002: he was concerned that that the council was using 15 year-old statistics to 'justify' current resident support. Knowles added:

"Considering the scheme contained a number of pledges no longer on offer, and approximately three times as many new build properties, would it be fair to suggest public opinion would not be in the council’s favour?"

"Martin Cowie, LB Barnet's assistant planning director, told the inquiry that the estate's current condition was 'not sustainable' into the long term. Some of the original promises made to the tenants have now been dropped – including rehousing everyone on the same site – due to the 'drastic and unforeseen economic downturn of the late 2000s'. But Mr Cowie insisted:

"Most of the pledges remain the same and will be met."

"(It should be noted that the council’s entire physical planning service has now been outsourced to Capita, giving rise to concerns about its commitment to defend resident interests against developers at inquiries such as this.)"