Reply Recieved
 

Got a reply from my MP Andrew Selous today.


C-I-M

A lovely phrase from the GAAC website :-

'A mile of road leads nowhere, a mile of runway leads everywhere'

I've sent mine using Writetothem.com

I have also offered to fly my MP to one of our rural airfields, just so he can see what we're talking about, get him more engaged and maybe we'll get another advocate.

Fingers crossed and may the flees of a thousand camels infest 2Jag's voluminous armpits

There was a feature on this on Meridean News last night. It was based on Old Sarum which would be a prime site for housing development, we nearly lost it to housing a few years ago. They didn't do the argument much good as they drew the conclusion that it wouldn't happen without consultation. I thought that the whole point was that, if the guidelines are accepted, this process would be short circuited.

They also interviewed the owner of Tarrant Rushton as if it was the same situation without making it clear that TR has not been an active airfield for many years. Of course, with the present state of farming, he would love to sell it for development.

It was rather a pointless piece of journalism in my view. Probably cost a bit too as they had a Luscombe doing some air/air and air/ ground filming. I enjoyed that.

Just wrote to George Galloway (my MP) highlighting that London's beloved Air Ambulance service at Whitechapel covering the M25 area and based at Denham may face serious disruptions if this policy goes through and London inches out further seeing the a/d gone.

Web site with further info has been updated:

EG:ok:

www.navex.aero

Great
 

Great Feedback from my PM today.

From Sir Michael Lord M.P

Dated 23rd Feb 2006

Dear Mr. Richardson

Thank you for your fax dated 19th February 2006 expressing concern about the proposed changes to the definition of brownfield sites.

I have read your letter with care and i share the concerns you express about this matter.

like you i think that the way the government proposes to introduce these changes without proper or indeed any consultation is quite unacceptable.

i have, in fact, already written in the most robust terms to the minister telling her of my deep unease with the way the government is planning to introduce these changes and as soon as i have her response i will write to you again.

well i think this is a great reply and look forward to the next letter.

Craig :ok:

I have written to my MP today and await a reply! Lets see if I am heard or ignored! Will keep you all posted.
John.

Got an automated email response from David Cameron's office 10 days ago saying that he gets a lot of emails since being elected leader but that he'll be in touch (he is my MP as well)

Nothing to date -bit disappointing:confused:

Reply form Sir Paul Beresford, Cons. Mole Valley.
 

All, reply is as follows:

Thankyou for your letter regarding the proposed changes for the planning guidelines relating to previously used airfields.

I understand that the Office of the DPM has now stated that this was a regretful ommision. It is their published intention to rectify this and return matters to the present situation.

I hope this solves the problem.

Yours etc...



Well, perhaps a genuine mistake then? Maybe we all assumed the worst?
But maybe it wouldn't have been rectified if we all hadn't had conniptions?
And maybe thay are all two-faced, corrupt conniving etc...
I guess we'll all be keeping a close eye on this to see if the ommision actually gets put back in...

regards

SimonHK

Changing policy
 

From what I've heard on Radio 4, writing e-mails has virtually no effect as e-mails are quick and easy to do. Writing (and posting) a snail mail letter is more effective as you have to put more effort into doing it in the first place. If I remember the discussion on last week's You and Yours correctly, I think the expert lobbyist was saying that if you send an e-mail you are assumed to be voicing your own opponion. If you write in politicians assume that at least 5,000 other people share your views.

Letter from: Hugh Robertson MP, Faversham and Mid Kent
 

Thank you for your letter of 16 February about the proposed changes to the planning guidance. It was kind of you to let me have your views.

I can wholly understand why you are so concerned and I can only say that I agree with you entirely. It is quite wrong that John Prescott should change the planning guidance in this manner and you have my full support.

I am sorry to say that it is entirely typical of his approach to planning in general and Kent in particular. It is yet another assault on our whole quality of life and is totally unacceptable.

In view of the serious nature of the issues you raise, I will write today to Mr Prescott personally. I will let you know as soon as I receive an answer.


On nice House of Commons paper as well :ok:

OC619

I got a letter from Dr. Nick Palmer today that said:-

My MP, Robert Walter, has tells me that he has received a number of letters and that he shares our concerns. He takes the trouble to show the difference between the PPG3 and PPS3 footnotes:

PPG3

"The curtillage is defined as the area of land attached to a building. All the land within the curtillage of the site (as defined above) will also be defined as previously-developed. However, this does not mean that the whole area of the curtillage should therefore be redeveloped. For example, where the footprint of a building only occupies a proportion of a site of which the remainder is open land (such as at an airfield or a hospital) the whole site should not normally be developed to the boundary of the curtillage. The local planning authority should make a judgement about the site layout in this context, bearing in mind other planning considerations......"

The equivalent footnote in Draft PPS3 is different:

PPS3

"The definition of curtillage is subject to the interpretation of the Courts and regard should be had to case law. All of the land within the curtillage of the developed land will also be defined as previously-developed."

He tells me that he has written to Yvette Cooper MP, Minster of Housing and Planning and will let us know her response.

Prescott's Persecutory Phobias
 

Received response from Paul Beresford MP for Mole Valley today.. Obiously a standard letter as it's identical to the letter that Simonhk on message 49 received. Identical letters we send will be ignored but not the other way round :confused:

Not sure what's going to happen now, lets hope for a better outcome !!..

Nik

Sent an e-mail to my local MP Ed Vaizey and to the office of 2jags not exepecting a reply at all. Yet to my amazement, there was a reply from my MP, even on house of commons paper! :eek:

Does anyone know if there is any sign that 2jags is reconsidering yet?

The saga has now has even made Private Eye.......!!!

Julian Brazier M.P. for North Kent replied to my letter today, saying that he was also writing to John Prescott and would let me know in due course the outcome.

I wait with bated breath!

Nigel

It was reported in the Telegraph (last week? can't find it on their website) that 2Jags had climbed down on this, so this does support the comments made elsewhere on this thread by some MPs.

Tim

I recieved a letter from my MP yesterday, he said housing was needed but not necessarily in green spaces and there should be a debate as to where the housing gets put. He dis say dissused airfields could be used and I guess as they are not working airfields that should possibly be OK. He did not like the fact the changes were tucked away in an Annex he said the proposals should have been in the main document for consultation.
He has written to 2jags and will forward the response when he gets it.
I guess it is still a case of watch this space.

I have just this minute received a reply from my MP Rosemary McKenna and she states that she was not aware of the reclassification of Brownfield sites but has written to 2jags office and will get back to me with an answer! She also points out that in Scotland the planning related matters are a Scottish Executive decision but maybe influenced by 2jags, this too she is investigating. So here is hoping we have stirred a hornets nest and may get a result!!! Watch this space.
John.