Constraints
I used to work in project management where we had the concept of the triple constraint. This means that any project has three key factors that can be altered or controlled. They are the cost, scope and timeframe. By increasing the scope, you also need to increase the cost (resources) and/or the timeframe. The three factors are tightly interrelated. You cannot change one factor without altering at least one of the remaining two factors. Put another way, you can please some people with increased scope but upset other people with increased cost and timescale.
While upsetting some people should not be a specific objective in politics, it is hard to imagine how political leadership can be effective or even present if this does not happen in practice. Politicians should seek to lead in the interests of the common good. In doing so, we need to address the community interest which might often be in conflict with unreasonable vested interests. Sometimes these unreasonable vested interests seem mainstream when they are nothing of the kind. This can be because they are noisy and well-reported in the media when compared to the viewpoint of the “silent majority”.
We live in a country with an increasing population and the long-term phenomenon of “housing fission” – the tendency towards smaller sizes of household. Alongside this, we have seen an increasing affluence enabling a wider ownership of second homes. If there are more people but not more homes, we must surely see an increase in homelessness. Politicians have to address the causes of the increased need for housing or that outcome or both. It is mandatory to do something. In practice in a democracy, mainstream politicians are not too keen to discuss the causes so that requires us, particularly at a local level, to address the need for more housing.
There is a housing waiting list of some 3,000 people in Crawley. This represents a clear housing need. I meet many people and groups who are advocates for more housing, especially affordable housing. My colleagues and I listen to these needs in the spirit of localism and we make plans for a multi-faceted approach to try and deliver.
I have never met and perhaps I do not expect to meet anyone or any group campaigning for a housing development within say 200 metres of where they live. We listen to these views as well, again in the spirit of localism. Any planning application for a new housing development goes through a politically independent process often being heard by the quasi-judicial Development Control Committee. Despite this, the difference between the views recognising housing need and the views opposing some of the solutions is a fundamental challenge. Not everyone can be pleased with the outcomes.
The delivery of housing for Crawley people remains a Council priority and we follow a number of parallel approaches to make this happen. We must succeed or too many people in our town could become overlooked. I mean of course people without homes.
Councillor Bob Lanzer, Leader of Crawley Borough Council
9th June 2010