Living on your own land

[PennyB]

Hello all,

Some may know me from Downsizer.

I am currenlty campaigning for the right for individuals to live on their own land. This has nothing to do with mass invasions by travellers, but just people living in a simple non-invasive and sustainable way, supporting nature and the environment, whilst developing true rural communities.

Planning controls would need to be in place, and dwellings would need to be temporary, to make sure developers did not start trying to make money from this.

The suggestion is quite high up now and has a real chance of being considered but more votes and comments will help.

Please look at the suggestion, and support it by voting and/or commenting if you feel so inclined.

Thanks very much!

Penny

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restoring ... r-own-land

[grahamhobbs]

I completely agree with what you are trying to do. The whole question of land is so political. Land tenure hasn't essentially changed since the Norman conquest, a tiny minority 'owns' the vast majority of the land. There is in fact sufficient agricultural land for every family to have 3 acres. On 3 acres a family could be very self-sufficient and have time to do 3 or 4 days work. 3 acres could easily provide all the food a family needs, as well as fuel for heating. Yet British agriculture only provides 50 to 60% of our food and 80% of that is produced on 20% of the land. Much land therefore is under-utilised. We demand the right to work, we should demand the right to be self-sufficent.

[homegrown]

I concur here in New Zealand great tracks of land sit idle and are owned by the government who some how have forgotten they work for us. Yet rules and regulations either prevent there use or discourage people from being self-sufficient and earning a small income from their land. Ther are even factories here with huge tracks of land buffers that they never do anything with, they could atleast plant some trees. But small landowbers cannot even have certain animals because it might offend some else. One Pig farmer I know was made to shut down their farm of thirty years because a big company built a golf course and country club behind their farm, and claimed the smell was affecting their guests. They even use to fly their helicopter over the animals to disturb them.

[Thomzo]

Hi Penny and welcome.
Whilst I admire your theory, I'm a little nervous of supporting it. If we aren't careful, large tracts of countryside would be littered with scruffy caravans or makeshift houses and areas of beautiful countryside such as Exmoor and the Lake district would just be a mess. Planning laws are there for a reason (albeit somewhat misguided at the moment) to stop every inch of land being built over.

But good luck. Maybe some compromise can be reached.

Zoe

[PennyB]

Hi Zoe,

Compromise is the most important thing and planning laws would be important too. But rural Britain should be a living breathing thing, not a playground for the wealthy. I would in no way support any change in planning regulations that would allow every inch of land to be built over, or shanty towns to grow up.

[grahamhobbs]

Most people choose to live in cities, but for those you want to live on and work the land planning laws artificially prevent this, maintaining high country property prices to the extent that even country born locals can't afford to live there.
To buy a house with a few acres, on which to be self-sufficient, in most of England is out of the reach of most people, they are reserved for the better off who want to keep a couple of ponies or simply look out on acres of grass.
For those who actually want to use the land productively, you can build your own house on your own land, but every obstacle seems to be put in your way. You have to demonstrate within 3 years that you can make a living off your land (note a living, to be simply self-sufficient and not a burden on the state is not sufficient) and then the size of house allowed will be dependent not on your needs but the size of profit you make from your enterprise, with the proviso that they will claim that you don't actually need to live on the land because you've already built a viable entrerprise in 3 years without living on the land (this forces people to raise large numbers of animals such as pigs, llamas, chickens, etc, (sheep, cattle, no good) although this may not be their interest simply to demonstrate to the planners the need to be living on the land).
All this is nothing to do with the look of your house, that can be dealt with in the normal manner. Remember also that the many of those beautiful cottages we so admire, dotted along our country lanes, squeezed between field and road, were built by squatters long before any planning regulations.
I would also have a simple solution to prevent developers building all over the countryside, that you would not be able to sell the house you built (or at least for many years). Ben Law was given permission to build his, now famous, house with the proviso that it had to be demolished if he stopped living there (this has now been changed so that his family could remain there).

[PennyB]

Thank you so much for all your support. I've posted this on a number of forums, and it seems to have touched a cord in so many people. The government will have to look at it, as it's about number 10 or 11 on the first page of the Restoring Civil Liberties section. The order is determined by number of comments, so it you haven't commented, and really want this to be seriously considered, please do comment as well as vote, just to make sure it stays up there.

Again thanks for the support :)

[grahamhobbs]

Penny, sorry for being a dimbo but I couldn't find how to vote or comment on your proposal on the government site.

[PennyB]

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restoring ... r-own-land

Try this- you may have to refresh a few times to get on. The voting bit is at the top - you just need to click on the fith of the five stars :)

Then scroll right down to the bottom and comment. You may have to register first.

[mamos]

Well done Penny

I have both voted and commented

Keep up the good work. Fantastic idea

mamos

[123sologne]

The idea sounds very good even if I agree with the worry about the risk of more damages to the land with more people utilizing it. This would need to be seriously regulated so the land is protected from the idiots out there who couldn't care less. There is definitely a big problem in this country with the countryside just becoming a playground to the cash rich. But no matter what you do or what you believe is right or wrong today, I cannot believe for one minute that any government would authorize it. They make money from us not being self sufficient, so they will never agree with this scheme. But hey, I may be too negative here... Good luck with the battle!

[oldjerry]

I too wish you well with this,but think you have picked a scrap with some of the most powerful groups in the UK ( wealthy landowners,NFU,DEFRA et al).It's just a thought, but in southern Italy most people live in towns but still have an 'orto'( bit of land that they tend on the outskirts more than an allotment,like a smallholding) .

[clanpowell]

'es got a point. We are moving to France to be more selfsufficient because it simply costs too much here. You cant get property with land here unless you can get your hands on nearly 1/2 million pounds. Same thing in France you can get for round about £150000. For us it's become a bit of a no brainer. And the government actually give decent incentives for going green.