There is inevitably some conflict that arises between meeting the seven currently listed aims. For example, the aim of developing homes on the scale suggested by the First Proposals (over 48 000 new homes by 2041) seems to override other (frankly more important) aims, such as those relating to climate change and biodiversity and green spaces. The vision sets out “a big increase in the quality of life for all our communities”, but development on the scale proposed, and particularly where it impacts on villages (wherein everyone is affected in a significant way by any new development) will undermine this aspect of the vision.

Whilst it is appreciated that the First Proposals appear to try and avoid extensive development in villages, this approach needs to be stated as a much clear and more explicit aim and objective. Not ruining the rural and semi-rural way of life should in by directly supported by an aim of the form suggested. Related to this, but worthy of status as a separate aim is the absolute preservation of the Green Belt, with no erosion of it at all. This policy should be absolutely central to any vision and set of aims, rather than the current watered down version whereby lots of time, effort and energy has clearly been spent analysing whether intrusion into the Green Belt is possible, with the general conclusion being that it is not. Now that this analysis has been undertaken, SCDC can have confidence that an explicit aim of not harming the Green Belt is appropriate and can save itself a lot of time in the future by not having to deal with a vast number of totally irrational and self-serving site proposals being put forward for analysis by wealthy land owners seeking to further line their pockets by selling Green Belt land in their ownership to developers for huge profit.

With this enhancement of focus in some areas and explicit statement of what appear already to be part of the approach adopted, the vision and aims will accurately reflect all that they should.