Chipping Barnet MP Theresa Villiers voices her opposition to Natural England on her mission to protect the Green Belt
Protecting the Green Belt is one of my highest priorities. Roughly a third of my Chipping Barnet constituency is either Green Belt or metropolitan open land.
I was therefore very concerned when Natural England - a quango that advises the Government on environmental issues - recently proposed to relax the rules protecting the Green Belt.
A little-known fact is the first Green Belt created in England was in our borough. In 1931, the former Hendon Borough Council designated an area between Hendon and Mill Hill as Green Belt land.
This area, since extended, provides an invaluable green wedge running through Arkley, Barnet, Hendon, Mill Hill and Totteridge. It is a haven for birds and other wildlife as well as home to leisure and sporting pursuits.
It was Sir Patrick Abercrombie, in his 1944 Greater London Plan, who laid the foundations for the planning laws and the London Green Belt we know today.
Abercrombie hated the uncontrolled urban sprawl into the countryside that had started to characterise the outer edges of London. His report recommended there should be a ten-mile wide belt around the capital of largely undeveloped, wild, or agricultural land.
Many of his recommendations were included in the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act. However, his Green Belt measures had to wait until 1955 when the then housing minister, Duncan Sandys, issued circular 42/55, establishing the London Metropolitan Green Belt.
For more than 50 years, the Green Belt has ensured urban dwellers have access to the countryside and its educational and recreational opportunities.
Not only has it protected the character of London's surrounding rural communities, it has also enhanced the special character of the capital's suburbs.
Natural England has suggested some of the "less pretty" areas of Green Belt be released to allow more land for development.
It alleges the Green Belt contains a lot of land which is neglected or of poor environmental quality. However, this overlooks the purpose of it, which goes much further than protecting scenic landscapes.
Many parts of the Green Belt which would never win a beauty contest have been designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest and contain important wildlife habitats.
This week, in my role as president of the London Green Belt Council, I have written to the Minister of State for Housing and Planning, urging the Government to resist Natural England's proposals.
Its argument that the vital protection the Green Belt has offered for years should be undermined because some of the areas covered are not as pretty as others just does not hold water. It is an excuse to allow more development on the Green Belt. That is why I am strongly opposing it.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article