There has been a lot of political argument about the overall target of approximately 91,000 homes and residents deserve the full story. Over 61,000 homes were already expected to be delivered in Buckinghamshire before the work began on this Plan. The choice facing the county was never between 91,000 homes and no development.  

Buckinghamshire Council has to take responsibility for the position in which the county now finds itself. They had six years to produce a new county-wide Local Plan and failed to get one in place. During that period, national planning policy and the method for assessing housing need changed. That delay left Buckinghamshire more exposed when the new housing requirements were introduced. Had Buckinghamshire Council got on with the job sooner, and put a Local Plan in place, the government would not have been required to step in and set a target and a timeline for delivery of a Plan.   

The Government's standard method now produces a higher assessment of housing need for Buckinghamshire, using a calculation that includes average house prices and average income. It is because the gap between these is large that the overall housing requirement is high in Buckinghamshire (and in other counties in a similar situation). 

But national government does not decide where those homes should go. That is Buckinghamshire Council's responsibility. 

Buckinghamshire Council has chosen to put forward a Plan which directs thousands of homes to Wing and Cheddington, further development to smaller villages around Aylesbury, and substantial additional growth in Aylesbury itself.  

Those are the choices I am challenging in my submissions to Buckinghamshire Council.

I am deeply concerned about the disproportionate impact of the Plan on the north and centre of Buckinghamshire, including Aylesbury and our smaller rural communities. 

Wing and Cheddington are the most striking examples. They are being asked to absorb development on an enormous scale. Cheddington is currently a small Tier 4 settlement, yet the Council proposes development of more than 5,000 homes there. Wing also faces transformational growth which would significantly alter its rural character. 

And these proposals cannot be looked at in isolation. Aylesbury has already experienced significant housing growth and faces very considerable further development, while smaller communities including Marsworth, Wingrave and Slapton are also being asked to accommodate more homes. Taken together, the scale of development proposed for this part of Buckinghamshire is substantial. 

This is difficult to reconcile with the Council's stated strategy of focusing development on larger and more sustainable settlements. It raises a fundamental question about whether development is being distributed fairly and sustainably across the county. 

I do not believe the Council has made a convincing case for concentrating development on this scale in Aylesbury and our rural communities. It should look again at the alternatives and reconsider both the scale and distribution of development proposed.

Across the constituency, residents already experience severe pressure on roads, schools, GP services, drainage and sewerage. The Council is proposing thousands more homes while its own evidence identifies substantial infrastructure requirements and significant uncertainty about how all of them will be funded and delivered. 

It is not enough to say that infrastructure will come with development. Our town and rural communities need confidence that the roads, schools, health services, public transport, water and wastewater infrastructure they will need can be funded and delivered at the right time. We are still suffering from where this has gone wrong in the past, like the promised GP provision in Kingsbrook that never materialised.  

Aylesbury itself is central to this picture. The town has already experienced significant housing growth over many years, and residents know what happens when infrastructure does not keep pace. Congestion, pressure on schools, health services and other public services are already part of everyday life for many people. 

Yet the new Plan proposes further substantial growth in and around Aylesbury, while at the same time directing significant development towards surrounding villages and smaller settlements. 

That is why the cumulative impact matters. These developments cannot be considered in isolation when they will place additional pressure on many of the same roads, schools, health services, public transport and other infrastructure. 

We should learn from Aylesbury's experience and not repeat the same pattern as further development takes place across the constituency. The Council needs to reconsider the scale and distribution of development where it cannot demonstrate that the infrastructure needed to support it can be delivered. 

Building the homes we need does not remove our responsibility to protect the natural environment or to make sure development is safe and sustainable. I have therefore made a specific submission about the environmental implications of the Plan. 

There are important questions about the effect of development on biodiversity, habitats and protected sites, landscape and agricultural land, water resources, drainage and flood risk. There are serious questions about the evidence the Council put forward, for example in Wing where soil testing shows productive agricultural land now at risk. 

Flooding is a particular concern. Communities in Buckinghamshire already experience flooding and drainage problems, and I have raised specific concerns about groundwater around Wing and the surrounding area but this is just one example. 

The Council's own evidence identifies areas where flood risk, surface water and the cumulative effects of development require careful consideration. Where thousands of homes are proposed, it is not good enough to assume that these issues can simply be mitigated later. 

The environmental impact also needs to be considered cumulatively. Several developments affecting the same water catchment, landscape or ecological network can have a much greater impact than looking at each site separately would suggest. 

These environmental constraints should help determine where development goes and how much development an area can sustainably accommodate. Where the environmental consequences cannot be satisfactorily addressed, the Council should reconsider the scale or location of development proposed. 

The need for genuinely affordable housing is one of the strongest arguments for building more homes in Buckinghamshire. Too many people are priced out of the communities in which they grew up, while others face long waits for social housing. 

Yet the Council's own evidence raises serious questions about whether some of the proposed developments can viably deliver sufficient affordable housing. At a national level, the government is clear that proposed housing development should include 40% affordable homes. So, the Council’s overall target for the north of Buckinghamshire of 25% affordable housing is simply not good enough.  

The Council should therefore look again at whether its chosen strategy will deliver the genuinely affordable and social homes Buckinghamshire needs, and whether a different distribution of development could deliver more. A Plan that delivers large numbers of homes but falls significantly short on affordable and social housing would be a poor deal for the communities being asked to accommodate that growth. 

I have also scrutinised carefully whether the proposed housing is not just affordable but accessible. I welcome the Plan’s recognition of the need for more accessible and adaptable homes but on this point the delivery will be key, including ensuring that these homes are in locations where disabled and older residents can access transport and other services that they need.  

I have specifically objected to the proposed developments near Wing and Cheddington, which would radically alter the character of two of our villages. These proposed developments are so disproportionate that they merit their own detailed assessment and response from me, which you can read by clicking the green button ‘read my submissions in full’.

I am not pretending that there is an easy answer to Buckinghamshire's housing need, and I am not saying that we should stop building homes altogether. I am asking Buckinghamshire Council to reconsider this specific Plan for the reasons I have set out.  

The Council needs to produce a Plan that is fair, sustainable and deliverable. That means looking again at the scale and distribution of development across the county, reducing the burden being placed on some of our smaller communities, and directing development towards locations that can genuinely accommodate it. 

It means choosing locations where the necessary infrastructure can realistically be delivered, where development is environmentally sustainable, and where we can build the affordable and council homes that Buckinghamshire so badly needs. 

It also means properly considering the cumulative impact of development. A site cannot be judged in isolation when neighbouring developments are placing pressure on the same roads, schools, health services, water systems and wider environment. 

Most importantly, the Council needs to listen to the communities that will live with the consequences of its decisions for decades. Residents who question whether their community can absorb hundreds or thousands of additional homes are not necessarily opposing housebuilding. They are asking whether development is happening in the right places, at the right scale and with the infrastructure necessary to make it work. 

Those are legitimate questions. The current draft Plan does not provide answers.