Opposition groups 'stop Central Bedfordshire from becoming developers' dreamland'
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
A political spat on social media followed a full council meeting where opposition councillors from the Conservatives, the Independent Network, Labour and the Liberal Democrats backed an amendment to extend the length of CBC’s next Local Plan to 2050, instead of 2045.
The proposal was moved by Green Party Ampthill councillor Susan Clinch and seconded by non-aligned Independent Leighton Linslade West councillor Victoria Harvey.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdIn a statement after the meeting, council leader and Independent Potton councillor Adam Zerny countered by saying: “I’ve voted to protect our countryside.


“I didn’t volunteer to become council leader only to abandon my principles for the sake of power. Opposition councillors have voted to extend the new Local Plan period by five years. That equates to an extra 10,700 houses. The public are rightly angry and I agree with them.”
The council’s executive discussed the plan period in December, and only four opposition councillors spoke, according to councillor Zerny. “Only one raised concerns about the length of the plan and said it shouldn’t be the minimum period of 15 years,” he added. “We subsequently recommended 17 years.”
A Local Plan helps councils meet nationally set housing targets in a sustainable and planned way, enabling homes to be delivered with the necessary infrastructure. If the government decides not to sign off a Local Plan, deeming it undeliverable, local authorities have no protection from speculative housing applications and no limit on the numbers built.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdIn a joint statement, the opposition groups on CBC explained: “The executive previously ignored pleas from all parties to extend the plan to reduce the risk of it being rejected by the government, creating a developer free for all.
“By extending the Local Plan, cross-party councillors have secured certainty for local residents and have given CBC the flexibility to plan in a sustainable and strategic manner.”
Councillor Clinch said: “There needs to be ambition and vision towards getting residents engaged with the Local Plan, rather than setting it up as a place to do battle.”
Liberal Democrat leader and Leighton Linslade South councillor Shaun Roberts accused the executive “of playing with fire with the future of Central Bedfordshire, risking a developers’ dreamland, with no protection for local communities from speculative applications”.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdHe warned: “An unsafe plan could have led to nowhere in CBC being safe from tens of thousands more houses, threatening every hamlet, village and town in a completely unsustainable and unplanned way.”
Conservative group leader and Clifton, Henlow and Langford councillor Richard Wenham suggested the executive “had no understanding of how to determine the appropriate length of our local plan period”, saying: “It was absolutely right that opposition councillors combined to correct the executive’s gross error.”
Leader of the Independent Network and Biggleswade West councillor Hayley Whitaker said: ‘It’s disappointing to see those in positions of power resorting to scaremongering to score political points, rather than putting their residents’ needs first.
“The number of homes to be built per year doesn’t change and the assertion that anyone voted for more houses is simply untrue.”
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdLabour group leader and Dunstable North councillor Matt Brennan added: “A local plan is about so much more than just housing numbers.
“It’s about all the things your council believes you deserve. Once you see past the empty political rhetoric of the executive, a long-term time frame ensures better results for everyone.”
Councillor Harvey confirmed: “This cross-party agreement significantly lessens developer power to build where they like and aligns us with government strategies for 2050, a key climate change date.”
Comment Guidelines
National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.