Richard Pavitt

Singapore at 60

Singapore this year (2025) celebrates its 60th anniversary as an independent state. While no nation is perfect – and Singapore […]

The Little Book of Independent Thinking: locally speaking! If you sense we hold Westminster politics in low regard, you’d be spot on Neil Gregory and Richard Pavitt Independent District Councillors Representing: Catmere End, Chrishall, Duddenhoe End, Elmdon, Great Chesterford, Little Chesterford, Littlebury, Littlebury Green, Pond Street, Strethall, Wendens Ambo, Wendens Loft. This little book isn’t about convincing you to vote for us, or anyone else. Thanks to some dubious collusion at Westminster there won’t be council elections in Essex before 2027 and more likely 2028. Instead, this little book is a collection of thoughts about the state of government, the ways in which it is failing us and the impact this has on rural communities such as ours. The impending reorganisation of local government in Essex is a case in point. This is a plan to dismantle county and district councils, replacing them with sprawling, centralised unitary authorities. No one is entirely sure why it is being done. There is scant evidence that ‘bigger is better’ and it certainly won’t improve democratic representation. The persistent failure of central government, regardless of who’s in charge, underscores one simple truth: local government needs to be genuinely local and independent of Westminster. But rather than increasing local democracy the changes barrelling towards Essex and other shire counties risk strengthening the grip Westminster has over our lives. Who’s Really calling the shots? Spoiler: It’s not us, the voters. There was a time when houses got built, public services were properly funded and our defence capability was maintained. Things worked. People went into politics or the civil service out of conviction or to contribute to the nation. It was the right thing to do. All that has long since changed. Westminster is now populated by self-serving opportunists and narcissists, weak on intellect, keen on power and willing to serve the highest bidder. What we recognise today as the neoliberal agenda has flipped the script, making govt subservient to big money and vested interests. The tail is firmly wagging the dog. Look beyond the slogans and there is little difference between Labour and the Conservatives. Elections don’t seem to make much difference. To make matters worse we are facing a seismic change in the structure of local government. It is a plan for Essex invented by the Conservatives, imposed by Labour and about which council tax payers don’t get a say. Labour and Conservatives joined forces in parliament to cancel the 2025 county council elections. By the time you do get to vote it will be a done deal. In short, it’s a stitch up. Over the next four years local government in Essex will change dramatically! Plans are in motion to scrap Essex County Council and merge the 14 districts and existing unitaries into a small number of unitary authorities. Uttlesford as we know it will vanish by 2028, a casualty of reorganisation being sold to us as “devolution” and “empowerment”. Each unitary will swallow up the duties of the districts it absorbs, plus those of the county council. An elected Mayor of Essex and a strategic authority will oversee police, fire, transport and some other functions. In a 2020 report, De Montfort University is not alone in saying “the case for centralising local government is based on arguments that are demonstrably false when looking at the genuinely independent academic evidence.” If you truly want to empower local people you would not do it this way. History shows the bigger the authority, the weaker the link between residents and their representatives and the more likely voting will align with national parties. So much for local democracy! What’s more, this reorganisation will be eye-wateringly expensive; and while Govt is calling the shots they have said nothing about paying for it. That may well fall on council tax payers. Farewell Uttlesford it was good while it lasted! As a consequence of the reorganisation Uttlesford will lose its own elected council and planning powers. The district will be swallowed into a unitary authority and these functions centralised elsewhere. Your elected local representatives will be fewer and more distant. And guess what? The Westminster parties see this as an opportunity to consolidate their power. However, this corner of Essex has a stubborn streak. Think Boadica and Oliver Cromwell. Fast forward from the English civil war to 2019 when Uttlesford voters emphatically turned away from Westminster politics to deliver an independently-controlled district council. That shift has been a breath of fresh air: less petty tribalism, fewer partisan shouting matches and more sensible decisions. Keeping that spirit alive under the new structure won’t be easy, but we have to try. Most of the local authorities in Essex, including Uttlesford, favour the creation of five unitary authorities, grouped as indicated on the map. This would see Uttlesford merged with Harlow and Epping Forest councils to create the North West Essex Unitary Authority. Faced with the inevitability of reorganisation this is thought to be the best way of retaining a connection to locality, while still meeting Govt’s desire for scale. However the Conservative Party (historically but no longer the dominant party in Essex) favours two mega-unitaries. The decision ultimately will be made by Whitehall. Govt claims that fewer, bigger units will offer economies of scale. Even if this were true (and evidence is scarce) is cost saving really all that matters? Government by spreadsheet is a dead-end street. For the moment we can protect our communities and countryside but for how long? Finally, after nearly 20 years and three abortive attempts, a new Local Plan for Uttlesford has been submitted to Government. The Plan is about meeting central Govt’s ambitions for new housing and industrial development while minimising harm and maximising benefit to our communities. It has also enabled us to set priorities and protections for the natural and historic environment of the district. It is a massive body of work for which everyone involved should be applauded. However, the process is never finished. Govt mandates that Local Plans and housebuilding targets must be reviewed and updated every five years. By the time of the first review Uttlesford will be part of a merged unitary authority with a combined housing quota dwarfing what Uttlesford has at present. A lot of development is already taking place around Stansted Airport and eastwards along the A120 corridor. It is inevitable the spotlight will point further north towards our patch and the consequences of the Cambridge effect. We need to be ready. The Cambridge effecT IS shaping our future The Cambridge-Oxford-London Golden Triangle is a global powerhouse in life sciences. Cambridge alone leads the world in research intensity. The OxCam Arc is back on the agenda, focussed on a new east-west railway with as many as 18 new towns along its route. However, that’s a long way off. Right now Cambridge is under intense pressure to expand its research infrastructure and housing. That pressure is heading our way. Witness what is already happening immediately across the county boundary at the Wellcome Genome Campus. Our close proximity to Cambridge has advantages: a vibrant city, healthy jobs market, excellent sixth form schools, and easy access to Addenbrookes Hospital and biomedical campus (soon to have its own railway station). The challenge for the north of Uttlesford will be retaining access to Addenbrookes, always remembering that we are in Essex and thus a different health authority area that happens to be focussing its attention on a new hospital in Harlow. Perhaps we should be campaigning to move this most north westerly part of Essex back into Cambridgeshire, as it was until 1894. Housing: promises, promises, but not a lot more. Labour’s pledge to build 1.5 million homes in five years is a pipe dream. Nothing Govt is saying about planning reform or prioritising affordable housing is going to shift the dial in a meaningful way for as long as marketisation is the prevailing model of delivery. Worse, the planning reform championed by Labour risks destroying years of hard gained environmental protections, while the party’s determination to use productive farmland for solar farms will blight rural landscapes. Thatcher’s sell-off of council houses, with no plan to replace them, set today’s housing crisis in motion. Decades of half-baked schemes for social housing and fudged schemes for “affordable” homes have left us in a mess. Young people are locked out, and soon we’ll face another crunch: by 2035, a quarter of us will be over 65, with nowhere near enough homes for later-life living. Fixing this needs a fundamental rethink—build homes to live in not to enrich landowners and developers. Soil, Water, Survival. WhERE’S THE plaN? Healthy soil and clean water should be non-negotiable. Yet these natural resources are exploited for profit and their protection eroded. In 2018 Michael Gove launched a 25 year Environmental Plan. How’s that going? Followed by the Environment Act 2021 and the 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan. Lot’s of policy, no signs of improvement. Now Labour is pitching a new approach to land use which they say will ‘empower decision makers’. And who are those decision makers? Ben Goldsmith, chair of the Conservative Environment Network and a non-executive director of DEFRA at the time of the 2020 Agriculture Act, remarks:  “When a fresh government of any kind is being formed, new ministers find themselves quickly encircled by powerful vested interests made up of people who consider nature and efforts to protect it merely obstacles to be steamrollered.” Farming is important and rivers play a vital part in our ecology, especially in Uttlesford with its rare chalk streams. Let’s hope that Labour DO have a plan and it is not simply another surrender to big money. Big money in British politics. So many questions. Q. Why is it possible for British political parties to accept unlimited amounts of money from donors? Q. Why is there no requirement for donors to be registered to vote in the UK? And why can companies making donations be owned by people who are not registered in the UK? Q. And why has Labour gone back on a pledge to tighten protections around foreign interference in UK democracy? In its manifesto, Labour committed to “protect democracy by strengthening the rules around donations to political parties.” There is very little evidence of action. We have been here before. In 2006, Labour ordered a review of political party financing and donations. The report was astute and far-sighted, with important recommendations. It was swiftly kicked into the long grass, never to be seen again. The Conservatives went even further (in the opposite direction) by loosening regulations and neutering The Electoral Commission. Now more than ever we need to protect our democracy from outside interference and malevolent players. If ever there was a reason to write to your MP this is it. There is no place for Westminster parties in local government. And finally... Do you get the impression Labour have been handed the keys on condition they toe the same line as the Conservatives? The Treasury’s fingerprints are evident. So too, are those of vested interests and lobbyists who have captured so many government departments and industry regulators. For them, the ends justify the means. It may sound conspiratorial but not a lot has changed, has it? Just a different party badge. Local Government is one of the few places remaining where we can genuinely shape our lives. Now even that is under threat, which makes it all the more important that those who represent you are independent of Westminster political parties. Stay safe. Think independent. © 2025 Neil Gregory & Richard Pavitt. All rights reserved. THE ROT GOES DEEP. PRESS AND POLITICIANS HAVE LOST OUR TRUST. It is deeply worrying that our press and members of parliament are held in such low esteem. According to the latest (2024) Ipsos Mori Veractity Index, politicians are at the bottom of the pile. Only 11% of people in the UK believe they can trust politicians to tell the truth. As for our press, the Edelman Trust Barometer, a 20 year study of global media trends, has UK media ranked lowest of 28 major nations. We were once a high trust society. The poor performance of our press has a compound effect. Without the cleansing effect of unbiased reporting our politicians are free to be economical with the truth. Our MP and leader of the Conservative Party believes there has to be an honest conversation with the British public. It’s a pity that honesty did not extend to Mrs Badenoch’s 2024 election campaign, which saw her making outrageously misleading claims about her performance on behalf of North West Essex constituents. When asked how he went bankrupt Ernest Hemingway replied: “Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.” You could say the same about the demise of our economy and loss of democracy.

Where next?

The ‘Little Book’ is a collection of thoughts about the state of government, the ways in which it is failing […]

Over the next four years local government in Essex will change dramatically!

To achieve what?

– Pages 4-5 of the Little Book: You would be hard pressed to find anyone who can provide a compelling […]

Farewell Uttlesford, it was good while it lasted!

A new reality

Pages 6-9 of the Little Book: As a consequence of the intended reorganisation Uttlesford will lose its own elected council […]

For the moment we can protect our communities and countryside but for how long?

But for how long?

Pages 10-11 of the Little Book: Finally, after nearly 20 years and three abortive attempts, a new Local Plan for […]