Law Makers Creating Law Breakers by Michael Bax

On 24 November I attended a Cambridge University Land Society Debate with a panel of speakers including James Paice (Shadow Minister of State for Agriculture) and prominent land agent Peter Faulkner (ex-President of RICS). Their brief was to consider the law they would like to change most if elected Prime Minister.

The range of proposals was as follows:-

1. Amend one part of the habitats directive which seems guaranteed to hasten the loss of the wildfowl it is designed to protect.
2. Introduce amendments to the rights of way legislation in order to allow landowners to at least participate in the process of modernisation. At present they virtually have no voice.
3. Repeal the hunting ban.
4. Re-establish the permitted development rights that used to benefit the agricultural industry.

Undoubtedly all noble sentiments and worthy of immediate legislation, but the thing that struck me was the thread that ran through everything. That is that all this ill-considered legislation drags innocent and law-abiding people into lawbreaking.

For instance:-

1. Like it or not, wildfowlers know more about wildfowl than any legislator. If legislation on wildfowl protection is futile, wildfowlers will ignore it, outlawing themselves in the process.
2. Landowners will initiate their own footpath diversions and get away with a lot of them. Others will suffer punitive fines.
3. We all know what is happening with the Hunting Act which itself occupied many more hours of parliamentary time than the Iraq war.
4. In planning, we see on a weekly basis numerous situations where property owners are proceeding with their development projects with no consent, in the full expectation of having to correct the situation with a retrospective application. This lawbreaking seems to be vindicated by the fact that at least 80% of these retrospective applications are granted. What a farce!

It’s a mad world, but how on earth do we reinstate commonsense and reality when the law makers appear not to listen to their consultees?

Kent's Economy by Michael Bax

One of the interesting tasks I have is to sit on the Business Advisory panel of the Kent Economic Board which meets on a quarterly basis in Maidstone. The meeting usually starts with a briefing by one of the SEEDA economists. We are hearing that unemployment is not too bad although there are hot spots in Kent. The other “positives” are continuing record low interest rates, the weak pound for exporters and signs of growth in other economies around the world. The negatives remain in the form of tough credit conditions – everyone seems to be agreed that whilst the Banks insist they are open for business – there is usually a reason why money will not be lent. Add to that the spectre of tax increases, public sector cuts and quite a bit of spare capacity in many businesses. The overall result is that firms are not planning investment.

Inflationary pressure will come from the price of oil and even the VAT increase from 15% to 17.5% will have an effect.

In the property sector there is general consensus that political interference in the planning process is highly destructive – there are great concerns that too much focus on the future of hi-tech business in the county is leaving much of Kent’s traditional industry struggling against the tide.

In agriculture, the gradual abandonment of funding from central government for research and development has serious long-term implications, particularly in an age when maintenance of food security is of paramount importance.

We then heard a bit from a representative of British Energy, now taken over by the burgeoning EDF. Future power generation focuses on low carbon and new nuclear/renewables. EDF nominated five sites for a new nuclear facility, including Dungeness, but as we all know the government are not satisfied that sufficient environmental mitigation is possible on the unique shingle environment of Dungeness. Against that, Dungeness Power Station is the largest employer on the Romney Marsh and on the other side of the coin, Kent is the subject of some of the country’s furthest reaching development proposals. Power requirements in the county are huge. Dungeness A is already decommissioning and Dungeness B has a projected life to 2018 - possibly beyond. EDF are applying for a review of the government’s decision and people will have read of the situation in parts of South Africa where daily two-hour power cuts are used to manage inadequate capacity. How would our businesses cope with that?

The Business Advisory Board voted unanimously to bring forward strong representations in relation to the Dungeness decision.