Housing & Travelers Strategy. There was a time ,when the man worked 50 hours+ a week while the mother stayed at home, one wage paid the bills ,today, women are expected to have a job, not saying they should not work but with Technology we have both couple working, we should be working 25 hours each, but we have many couples working 70/80 hours a week, and still have a national debt, something is radically wrong. 

There was a time when the average family spent just 10% of their income on housing ,and 50% on food, today it can be 50% plus on housing This is causing much of our family breakdown.

Everyone needs a purpose. There are young people not wanting to get a job, as they have no purpose in work or family connections. We have a broken system that needs to change! 

Angela Rayner wants o see 1.5 million homes built, what happens if we build those homes,? What would follow.? Build some more then import people to fill them up, to keep this system going? One wonderers?

The Chancellor is looking at capital gains tax to raise revenue to cover the debts the government has, in many ways created. with young people priced out on the housing market and rents being unaffordable to most incomes I would suggest applying capital gains tax on houses sold above £200,000. If a house purchased in the 1960s / 70s, £10 / £15 thousand, and now sold at £350,000 is not a capital gain, then there is no such thing. Developers are building what they want to sell, and not what we need. 

The system, There is no need for anybody on the planet to be homeless ,hungry or thirsty, but there are many. All three should all be easily provided. Communism becomes a dictatorship, and does not work, Capitalism is like the game of Monopoly: you start out, every one enjoys the game ,as time goes by, some players drop out, eventually the winner takes all.

Local Planning Procedure. First of all, developers should not be putting in planning applications. The Local council should be finding the sites, then inviting developers to tender to build what we need, not what they want to sell. There should not be more than two major applications held on one day. Members of the public should be able to speak within reason, as long as it take to explain the issues they have with the application. Councilors on the planning committee should be able to ask the public speaker questions regarding the points one has raised. Developers should not have to pay for an application if it is refused.

Often individuals cannot risk putting in an application, if it is lost. This would allow other options to be considered. This may mean those applications that get through, would have to pay any shortfall from those lost. But one needs to remember most do go through eventually. I would like to suggest to you that we consider building affordable homes in all out villages, even those who have seen an increase in housing numbers .and those who have not had any new homes, should take 40/50 homes, as enclosed., unless they can prove they have not been responsible for the increasing population? 

Also, regarding the voting age change to 17/18 year old s, We should ask them if they would like to get off the housing Ladder.? And this week the media have mentioned rents, they never end .We need to change the way we house the people, no renting or market housing? All so, I write regarding some issues with housing developments and the 1.5 million homes the Government is hoping to build. Over the years we have seen many hedges removed from the fields and ditches that used to take the surplus water filled in, hence wetter fields, coupled with environmental policies not cleaning the main rivers has caused flooding of the land. 

New housing developments should now be built as suggested in this document, where one can have solar panels along the roofs and underground water tanks to save the water for the Summer months to use on the gardens to feed the residents. These developments need to include vertical growing areas for fresh vegetables to feed the residents. Developers should not be the ones to apply for planning permissions.

Local Councils should find the sites, then invite developers to tender to build what is needed, and not what they can sell on the market. There is a simple answer, cap development land at 100 years from farming the land ,build the houses at cost, one can purchase them, but not sell onto the market, and have no rented properties .rent never ends. When those who pay rent, When the retire the state will be paying billions on housing benefit.. There should be a survey, asking young people if they would like to be off the housing ladder?

Visit www.theplanetandpeoplecoalition.co.uk see headings Think Global Live Local & Why are so many people obsessed with property values? 

If the government controls the uplift in land purchase, then gives the land to the developers at lower prices, they don't cheapen the houses they build!. .

If people can't afford to buy, and continue to pay rents, when one retires, the state will repay billions in Housing benefits. it would be better to allow people to purchase their homes ,but not resell onto the market. 

The house I live in cost £1,500 to build in 1948. Why can't that be still the same price? One may well say, one cant buy another one. the older they are the cheaper they would be, and one could have saved in the meantime if one wanted to Purchase a newer home. 

We have been told of the water shortage we will experience in the coming years. 

We are witnessing developments taking place, with no Water holding points on new estates. 

There may be some solar panels, but not everywhere. Also, there are no new shops on new sites where one can have a collection point for deliveries or a convenience shop to save traffic traveling to a town, where we find traffic gridlock., thus creating air pollution. 

The huge spanner in the works is that the house building system is driven by developers who want to make as much money as possible. Councils need to take control over the developers, before more damage is done. 

I enclose my websites, you will find my idea for new developments, where the long roof for solar panels and one can save the water run off with holding tanks for recycling the water and use the water for the garden in the dry times, while feeding the residents with healthy food. Also retired residents could help with the growing of the produce, while helping to maintain a healthy lifestyle. I am sending this to a number of housing groups. and farming organizations. You can find the full presentation at www.landandleisurecoop.uk see unity in the community. also visit www.theplanetandpeoplecoalition.co.uk see Think Global Live Local. And the history of village life.

We are now being told to work to 68,then70,as the cost of pensions is becoming too expensive. Have those who make up the rules not realize we are not needing to employ so many people now as we needed 50 years ago.

We are now told, we are not saving enough for our later years as we retire. Now with property prices out of range for younger people, and rents taking over 50% of one's income, How can one save? So those who can't work will become too old to employ, too young to get the pension, so will be on unemployment and the housing benefit & state will be paying billions for Housing benefit to cover the never ending rents we pay. There is a simple answer, cap development land at 100 years from farming the land, build the houses at cost, one can purchase them, but not sell onto the market, and have no rented properties.

● One solution is to create small farms that one can enjoy and create employment, instead of paying set-aside or countryside stewardship, the money could be used to help create new local produce including cheese, a smokery, cutting room for meat, a bakery for pies etc. Local dairy, free range poultry for eggs and meats, fruit storage, freezers for storage, and energy crops should be utilized. It would be better for 10 farmers to have 40 cows each, rather than one farmer with a few hundred. Animals would have better care and attention.

● Farmers who have no charge on their land are paying high rents for short-term lettings, so the price is spread over the whole. If they were paying a yearly charge, they may not be so keen. The young farmer can’t bid on fair ground. In order to encourage more family farms, we should introduce a land tax. 

The following suggests a guideline as to rental value: English Rates

Grade One - £80 per acre.

 Grade Two - £60 per acre.

 Grade Three - £50 per acre.

 Grade Four - £30 per acre.

 Therefore, if one inherited a farm one would only pay tax equivalent to rental value and this could be paid annually into the National Fund. For example, if one inherited Grade Three land, the following would apply: 1-100 acres - no tax, 101-200 acres - 50% of rental value i.e., 200 acres = £3,000 p.a. 201- 300 acres - 50% of rental value i.e., 300 acres = £4,500 p.a. over 300 acres - 100% of rental value. 

Where land is let, no tax should be payable. This would prevent multi-nationals from purchasing and controlling large estates. But there could be an advantage if they created long-term farming tenancies. Living accommodations must go with the holdings, so livestock is looked after properly.

● Family farms, where there are beneficiaries who are not farming the farm, should be made into part tenancies, for the non-farming families then would receive a rent. This would prevent the farming Members having to borrow on land values rather than on agriculture income values. We could have a ruling where the farmer could pay rent to other members of the family, so they become a part tenant of the holding. Rents would have to be within income from produce. The land would come under any new scheme. There are too many speculators in forward buying of food, and land investors. A new concept is needed for land use. Maybe we should make a ruling, only those who are in farming working the land can purchase land, not those wanting to buy land as an investment. The land payments could be paid to the Local Authority. This would go a long way to cover their shortfall of funding.    

Travellers - There are some large issues regarding travellers and gypsies. There are also a number of people who don’t wish to come under these banners, but at the same time would like to be able to move around and not be tied to a house or a mortgage. A portion of any new development should be put aside to accommodate these people. There are 200,000 travelers occupying social houses, many of these people have nowhere else to go because governments have failed to create proper sites for travellers. If we were to plan some good sites for those who wish to not live in a house we could release nearly 100,000 council homes for those on the waiting list. There should be provision for some slots in large developments for those wishing to move from place to place ,creating a travelling propels community.

We are spending £24 billion a year on housing benefits, £34 billion on helping first time buyers to get on the housing ladder, all this could be stopped, Then, create a Community Land Trust, transfer that capital to the Trust, so the capital would be used over and over again, as the occupiers would take out a mortgage on the properties. With developers building on the website, we would have healthier children, less health issues with older people, less crime, cleaner air to breathe.

We are seeing children going to breakfast clubs, so mothers can go to work. Children living in poverty, while others are obese. Shoplifting is increasing, in some cases because families can't manage on their income, others ,because they know no different ,as they had parents that did not live together, or were did not feel part of the family when they were growing up.

We keep having consultations that appear to be saying the same things. Why are we still allowing developers to build what they want to sell, and then have the same problems?

See enclosed papers from unity in the community and sustainable housing & Adult Social Care.

Work less, save more, enjoy life.

E-mail: lvkeeley45@gmail.com

Laurence Keeley.

6 Fairfield, Herstmonceux,

East Sussex.

BN27 4NE.