erat_forte Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 +1 Totally agree. This is about taking public wealth and moving it into private hands. I once had an allotment, hated it, havingto go there to do anything and being criticised for having too many weeds. But there is a long history in England, of taking public land and re-distributing it to private interests. "trickle-up" economics at its finest. Got to keep the wealthy landed elite in the manner to whcih they are accustomed, and keep the lower orders firmly in their place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
council dweller Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 I once had an allotment, hated it, havingto go there to do anything and being criticised for having too many weeds. Yes I`d hate it too. There`s nothing like having a large council house garden especially after living in a gardenless hovel in japan for 15 years. I`m sure that mr `smith` must live like this too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverwhere Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 I once had an allotment, hated it, havingto go there to do anything and being criticised for having too many weeds. But there is a long history in England, of taking public land and re-distributing it to private interests. "trickle-up" economics at its finest. Got to keep the wealthy landed elite in the manner to whcih they are accustomed, and keep the lower orders firmly in their place. Sure, the whole thing is entirely in line with both historic and current mainstream political ideologies. I sometimes wonder what our society would look like if that b@stard Cromwell hadn't so thoroughly betrayed the diggers and the levellers, although probably they would have just been betrayed by somebody else instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepLurker Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Really? A thread encouraging artificially preventing house building by forcing local authorities to withhold land for that purpose? On HPC? I think that the consensus on HPC (assuming such a thing is possible) is that "build houses at any cost" is as stupid as B.A.N.A.N.A. We need more houses, but they need to become communities - i.e. along with the houses, we need to have schools, parks, pubs, etc... And allotments are part of that social fabric. I don't have one myself, can't see myself ever getting one - but IMO they are part of what makes a community. Selling them off is as stupid as selling off playing fields. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexw Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Really? A thread encouraging artificially preventing house building by forcing local authorities to withhold land for that purpose? On HPC? I have to say I find it amusing that you have framed your response in this way. From your posting history I am quite sure you see a shared resource such as this as "socialism" which must be destroyed. We can't let any reservoirs of it to remain can we? It must be uprooted root an branch otherwise how can the winner in "winner takes all capitalism", take it all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Some allotments are in really dumb places though. It makes sense to build houses close to where people work, and perhaps have allotments on the city edges like those dachas in russia just outside moscow and other cities. Also as often they are in the development envelope it will be easier to get planning permission, compared to virgin farmland...id assume new allotments wouldnt require planning so from a time and money POV it makes sense. But yes, id insist any allotments built on are replaced by at least as much allotments less than a mile or two away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smyth Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) You couldn't be more wrong. I have never had an allotment, I have never grown anything to eat, the nearest to me is about two miles away (if it is still there) and I think they look an eye sore. How ever once they are gone they are gone. I put the pleasure of 12 people doing their allotment above one person with a couple of horses in a field. Oh and there are fields closer to me than the allotments are. But how is this any different from the usual: "We have to protect the countryside for future generations! Its not that I am being selifsh, its that building new houses will silence the sound of nightingales which are enjoyed by the people lucky enough to already own a house here!". Of course NIMBYs dont actually believe/admit they are acting in self-interest, its always dressed up in some narrative about how development will spoil natural resources enjoyed by others ("once they are gone they are gone" could be a battlecry for the whole movement). Much like beautiful unspoiled countryside, allotments are great for the people who already own a house in the area, and managed to get to the top of the allotment waiting list. For people who cannot afford a house in that area, they are bad because they are taking up space which could be used to build houses for people to actualy live in. If people really derive so much pleasure from allotments, then whats wrong with asking them to pay for them? Most allotments are heavily oversubscribed with long waiting lists because unsurprisingly, when you offer something for free, everyone wants it. Edited March 30, 2014 by Smyth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexw Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) But how is this any different from: "We have to protect the countryside for future generations! Its not that I am being selifsh, its that building new houses will silence the sound of nightingales which are enjoyed by the people lucky enough to already own a house here! Allotments are great for the people who already own a house in the area, and managed to get to the top of the allotment waiting list. For people who cannot afford a house in that area, they are bad because they are taking up space which could be used to build houses for people to actually live in. Because it's a question of balance. Nimbyism is to build NO houses anywhere, and using other reasons such as green spaces as an excuse. It is right and proper to have some communal resources in the locality of housing, it is not right and proper to say communal resources e.g the view, should mean no more housing should be built. If we followed your point of view then we'd build housing with no footpaths, no gardens, no roads, no shops, no nothing except the housing itself, because everything else is nimbyism which reduces the amount of housing we could build. Edited March 30, 2014 by alexw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy soy Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Aah right. You want land available for house building but you want it to be your choice of land and not the bits you don't want. I look forward to your next post in a thread about NIMBYism. Same goes for anyone signing this petition. Land available from selling off allotments that could be used for building houses is minuscule. It's tinkering at the edges whilst ignoring the fact there are huge amounts of land, agri and green belt, that could be put to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worzel Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) Aah right. You want land available for house building but you want it to be your choice of land and not the bits you don't want. I look forward to your next post in a thread about NIMBYism. Same goes for anyone signing this petition. what a tool. Voice of absolute rubbish. Wrong on so many levels you don't deserve a thorough analysis of your flawed thinking. edit to add - petition signed Edited March 30, 2014 by worzel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) If people really derive so much pleasure from allotments, then whats wrong with asking them to pay for them? Most allotments are heavily oversubscribed with long waiting lists because unsurprisingly, when you offer something for free, everyone wants it. What a tool. Once again there was no problem with allotments before the banking crisis. Now there is. Fancy that. The Tory rentiers will ensure everyone pays, except who should be paying. Edited March 30, 2014 by aSecureTenant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Help to Sell Veg Tories love a free market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Allotments (where in demand and reasonably practicable) are a Good Thing. Compulsion is a Bad Thing and there should be a high bar to imposing it. Likewise red tape. And the dead weight of one-size-fits-all diktats from central government denying local government flexibility to adapt to local circumstances are one of the big things wrong with this country. So credit where credit's due. This may be a drop in the ocean of the red tape that binds us, but it's none the worse for that. Thank you Eric Pickles for a move, however small, in the right direction. John Major called it "subsidiarity", and this is the kind of case where he was right to ask for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juvenal Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) My allotment is one of 102 plots on a site of 3.1 acres. The whole site produces maybe £5K in rents; ploughed back into maintenance of paths, trees, water points, fencing, a skip twice a year for non-compostables, admin etc. One of the few things that isn't profit-minded these days. The single older lady on the plot next to me lives in a third floor flat. She loves flowers. Her allotment plot gives her flowers, veg, raspberries and enormous pleasure, exercise and social contact.. Another woman grabs a couple of hours break on her patch from caring 24 hrs a day for a terminally ill husband. Says it keeps her sane. Sob stories - but true. 102 plot holders... partners, kids often come to help as well. All with a different reason for being down there on fine days Seems a damn good use of three acres to me... Edited March 31, 2014 by juvenal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Seems a damn good use of three acres to me... From what you say, no argument there[1]. But that's not the issue. The issue is rather who decides to allocate those plots. A politburo at Westminster, or someone accountable to your local community? Seems Mr Pickles favours the latter, while many on HPC want the former. [1] Though one might question the criteria for a select few to enjoy that privilege while others are denied it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gf3 Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) I think everybody should be given as much land as they want. Just give them a spade and let them dig over the area they want just to prove they really want it. I wonder if Donald Trump really wants 213 acres? Edited March 31, 2014 by gf3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Allotments are under threat from NIMBY's too. They don't like those unsightly sheds. Local Council decided to turn some open land near Denby Dale into allotments. Local NIMBY's were outraged, as it was prime NIMBY/boomer dog pooping land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepLurker Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 But how is this any different from the usual: "We have to protect the countryside for future generations! Its not that I am being selifsh, its that building new houses will silence the sound of nightingales which are enjoyed by the people lucky enough to already own a house here!". Of course NIMBYs dont actually believe/admit they are acting in self-interest, its always dressed up in some narrative about how development will spoil natural resources enjoyed by others ("once they are gone they are gone" could be a battlecry for the whole movement). Much like beautiful unspoiled countryside, allotments are great for the people who already own a house in the area, and managed to get to the top of the allotment waiting list. For people who cannot afford a house in that area, they are bad because they are taking up space which could be used to build houses for people to actualy live in. If people really derive so much pleasure from allotments, then whats wrong with asking them to pay for them? Most allotments are heavily oversubscribed with long waiting lists because unsurprisingly, when you offer something for free, everyone wants it. I look forward to your post arguing that parks and playing fields should also be sold off and converted into housing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1929crash Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Allotments are under threat from NIMBY's too. They don't like those unsightly sheds. Local Council decided to turn some open land near Denby Dale into allotments. Local NIMBY's were outraged, as it was prime NIMBY/boomer dog pooping land. Well, at least the soil should be fertile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomandlu Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Check out the history of Westonbirt Arboretum. Do you have a suitable link? (I know this place, so you've got me curious). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) Do you have a suitable link? (I know this place, so you've got me curious). read about the history on site...how the lord of the manor stole all the land, and took over all the villages...cant find a link instantly, but I guess if you look up who owned it before the Forestry commission that might reveal. Edited March 31, 2014 by Bloo Loo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Allotments are under threat from NIMBY's too. They don't like those unsightly sheds. Local Council decided to turn some open land near Denby Dale into allotments. Local NIMBY's were outraged, as it was prime NIMBY/boomer dog pooping land. What, yet more Enclosure of the Commons to benefit a privileged few? I don't even know where Denby Dale is, but I can see that's outrageous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomandlu Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 read about the history on site...how the lord of the manor stole all the land, and took over all the villages...cant find a link instantly, but I guess if you look up who owned it before the Forestry commission that might reveal. Ah - I thought you meant some more recent event, but thanks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) Ah - I thought you meant some more recent event, but thanks... it was historic...there is a bit on wiki about "relocating the villagers" in order to straighten the roads and build the house. IIRC, much of the estate was common land and therefore the villagers were free to graze their stock on it. Of course, the Lord being immensly rich with many of the family being Sheriffs, Magistrates et al, they could pretty much do as they pleased. Edited March 31, 2014 by Bloo Loo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patfig Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/61225 Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary, is examining plans to free local authorities from a 103-year-old obligation to provide plots of public land for cultivation by gardeners. The proposals could see local authorities, many of them strapped for cash under government-imposed cuts, selling off allotment land for social housing or even for profit to major companies. MODS: Can this stay on the front page for a couple of hours? Done Up yours Pickles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.