According to a recent Financial Times report, the affordable housing threshold on non-public land in London is to be cut from 35 per cent to around 15 to 20 per cent. The current 50 per cent target for public land will likely drop to around 35 per cent.

At the same time, developers may see both design standards and community infrastructure levies reduced. Yet on page 39 of their election manifesto, Labour promised to “deliver the biggest increase in social and affordable housebuilding in a generation” and to “strengthen planning obligations to ensure new developments provide more affordable homes.”

But not, it seems, in London. Earlier this year, The Times reported that almost 27 per cent of London properties sold in the first quarter of 2024 went to foreign buyers, three per cent more than a year before. A London School of Economics study also found that for every one per cent rise in sales to overseas buyers, house prices increase by 2.1 per cent.

We’ve seen a similar effect here in the South Hams, though ours is largely driven by retirees and second-home buyers from other parts of the country.

Now, the government plans to introduce last-minute amendments to its planning and infrastructure bill. The Financial Times quoted Alexa Culver, a planning lawyer at RSK Wilding, explaining that these changes would allow the Secretary of State to overrule local planning authorities even where there would be “irreversible and uncompensated nature loss, where infrastructure isn’t in place to sustain the new developments, or where there is insufficient water for the homes to access.”

Rachel Reeves claimed the move showed Labour was serious about prioritising economic growth. Yet the party’s other pledges to deliver more affordable housing, improve access to nature, promote biodiversity and protect landscapes appear to have slipped down the list.

How much longer, then, will local planners be able to insist that all major South Hams housing schemes deliver 35 per cent affordable homes and meet policies protecting landscape and wildlife? Or will the Secretary of State simply override those protections in the name of “growth”?

The government has already shown itself willing to ignore local concerns when it suits. Only recently, Ed Miliband approved a 3,000-acre solar “factory” on productive farmland at Tillbridge in Lincolnshire, the third such scheme in that county within a year.

Lincolnshire County Council leader Sean Matthews said: “The fact that the objections of local people and councils are waved aside for these massive projects in our area is beyond frustrating. This solar factory will be the biggest in the UK and absolutely dwarf nearby villages, destroying the character of the area and eating up high-quality agricultural land that the UK needs for food security.”

Devon could soon face a similar fate, with a 2,700-acre mega solar site planned near Holsworthy. Other large-scale schemes, including in the South Hams, will inevitably follow. Some even argue we should lead the charge, carpeting our countryside with panels and turbines.

Should that happen, and should the government also achieve its housebuilding targets, there will be little countryside left unspoilt. Our quality of life will decline, tourism will suffer, infrastructure will strain, and our electricity bills will certainly not be £300 a year cheaper by 2030.

Beware of politicians bearing promises.