Government set to gain millions from Barn Hall
Recorder, 12 June 2009

THE Government is set to make millions of pounds from a controversial homes development on Barn Hall, Wickford.
   Documents seen detail how six years ago Whitehall instigated plans to concrete the beauty spot, with a clause entitling the government to 85 per cent of any profit through house sales.
The Department of Environment sold the site to Gleeson Homes in 2003 for just £150,000 with the strict pay back clause.
   Billericay" MP John Baron has branded the revelation a conflict of interest and demanded the Government revoke the planning permission it approved following a costly legal battle with the council.
   He said: "The whole community was against development - residents, councillors and the MP.
"The Planning Inspectorate agreed, yet the Government rode roughshod over local democracy.
"The Secretary of State's decision made little sense at the time, but an 85 per cent kickback now perhaps explains it."
   He has written to the Government demanding the permission is revoked now the documents have come to light, or he will ask the council to consider fresh legal challenges.
   It was not made public the Government stood to profit when Gleeson Homes first unveiled plans for 200 homes on the former green belt site in 2006, or at any time during the three-year planning battle.
   Last year an impartial planning inspector sided with the council and campaigners, throwing out the scheme, but was overruled by the then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears in October.
Shocked - Jacqueline and Peter Boynes with the contract which shows the Government stands to make millions
   Peter Boynes, of Wickford North Green Action Group, which spearheaded the battle, estimates 200 homes, at £100,000 a plot, could be worth up to £20million.
   He said: "I'm horrified to learn of the extent to which the Government will benefit -85 per cent is truly enormous. This is a matter which has never been made public, not even during the public inquiry."
   A contract obtained using the Freedom of Information Act shows how the Department of Environment, which took ownership of Barn Hall during the Second World War, forced Gleeson to submit a planning application and see it through to the bitter end of the appeal process, even if the council rejected its plans.
   Mr Boynes added: "I really do not know what the public is entitled to feel about both the extent of local democracy and the impartiality of planning decisions in this country, based on this information."