stuck in to something creative that didn’t mean having to put up with the building inspector as we now know him.
‘Years ago there was a building inspector in my area, one of three or four who covered the work. We had to phone up before ten in the morning if we needed an inspector to come out and sign off a trench or a bit of steelwork. Whenever any of us made the call we had our fingers crossed that it would not be Jack Higgins, because he always spelt trouble. He was an angry man whose pleasure in life was to put other people down by exerting his authority. You all know the sort. One day one of my friends called him out and, when it became clear that Jack was not going to be reasonable, lost his temper and laid him out. After the dust had settled we all waited for the inevitable enquiry and visit to the magistrate’s court, but it never happened. It turned out that he had a very bad marriage and it couldn’t stand the enforced two weeks off work. His missus walked out. When he got back to work he refused to press charges and, from that day, rejoined the ranks of the human race.’
‘Sorry about that, it probably doesn’t add much to the debate, but I always thought it was a great story.’
It was agreed that the ‘Estate Group’, as they would now refer to themselves, would, there and then, go off in search of Mrs. Brampton’s committee room, led by Henry, only just ahead of Imogen both physically, as they strode off, and in his determination to get stuck in.
Joan Brampton was soon found in committee room fifteen, given over to her by the house managers as an office from which to manage the progress of her proposal. The room was a hive of activity with a number of small groups talking animatedly, and Joan with her head down over a sheaf of papers.
Harry already knew Joan from the two years each had spent in one another’s approximate vicinity but had never worked closely with her. He quickly introduced the group, as like’minded MP’s, who would be very pleased to help Joan’s proposal in whatever role would be most helpful.
‘Thank you very much for your offer. Although I’ve already had a lot of messages of support, and you can see around you some of the volunteers that have already been playing a role in working up the idea, you are the first members to arrive on my doorstep. It would be lovely to have you on board. Henry may already have told you what a big day we all think this is. We’ve seen it coming for the past year but, given that my proposal only came out of the ballot of members a few days ago, there’s an awful lot of work to do to build it up into a complete project.
The most important thing we need to do is to put some numbers to the proposal. By the way we’ve chosen to call it P. One, for short. P for planning, but also for parliament, and one because it’s the first truly new proposal that we have been able to consider.
What will help us is to find a way to make P.One self-financing in the medium term and to be able to demonstrate this in very clear and simple terms to the electorate. It is certain that any proposals for expenditure coming from the Chancellors release of funds will be subject to referendum and we must prepare for that. It’s also true that there are bound to be other proposals competing for funds, so we’ve really got to do a good all-round job.
Perhaps you would all like to meet up in this Office on Thursday afternoon, two o’clock. There’s no debate planned for that afternoon and you’ll probably all want to get back to your constituencies on Friday. We can thrash it all about and share out some responsibilities if you’re in agreement.’
The next couple of days were busy for all. A variety of other proposals were debated in the chamber, including one for the creation of local community enterprises alongside an information, advice and training function that would help in their creation. The raison d’etre for this proposal was that it would be better for communities to supply many of the jobs and services that their members currently had to travel to, than to have to find the money to run their cars in a regular commute.
This proposal caught the eye of the ‘Estate group’, particularly because it could be seen to complementary to P. One. Perhaps the proposals could be linked in some way or exist in a beneficial symbiosis.
Thursday afternoon came around soon enough, and the meeting in committee room fifteen came to order. Joan Brampton chaired.
‘Welcome to P. One, everybody. The purpose of this meeting is to agree how we may all contribute to the working-up of P. One into a knock-em-dead winner. You’ll all by now be aware that the Press and Television have been lining up to take sides on the project. We’ve already seen some pretty outspoken comments from ‘the usual suspects’ but there has also been some more thoughtful commentary. It seems to me that, on average, the jury is out and may be sympathetic in the end, if we do our job well. Internally I’ve received a lot of encouragement from the Chancellors office, but laying great emphasis on value for money. We’ve been in an austerity economy for so long now it’s become a bit of a habit. A good habit, mind.
The House manager has also signed an expenses order for P. One, giving this office a budget for expenses and professional services that we may need to buy in. He’s also given us access to the house lawyers and some other internal services. I actually think that John Parminter is so inclined to help that if I’d asked him for a quick shag in the broom cupboard in the name of essential research, he would have said yes.
I’d like to suggest some of the general areas we need to concentrate on.
First. We need to come up with a physical plan for a typical development. We need to describe the amount of land needed, and to define the type and where it may come from. We can’t, for example, expect to take land that already has an important function, nor can we expect to take land, development of which will effect the ordinary enjoyment of his or her home by the landowner. As part of this we need to come up with some suggestions for scale. Is it, for example, sensible to have scattered single-dwelling development, or should all development be multiple. This will very much relate to the cost-effectiveness issue.
Secondly. We need to come up with costed designs, appropriate for different landscapes with different resources. To do this we need to prepare a briefing that will accurately describe the limitations applied, whether this be an overall price per dwelling or the types of material allowed. We also need to define in some measurable way the required efficiency of each home.
Thirdly. We need to get out there and talk to the local communities and to the landowners to try and measure their reactions, both positive and negative. We need to be able to show how things can work in practise, and give some examples.
We also have to give some thought to the construction of the new controlling body that will be needed if P. One is passed, and how this can be done without increasing the size of the State, which is, at the moment, embargoed.
Suggestions?’
In the room were around thirty MPs, both new and ‘old’, but the only ‘activists’ were the Estate Group. It was quickly agreed that all of those present would be ready and willing to assist in whatever way they could in response to Joan Brampton and her newly aligned ‘Estate Group’. It seemed a very sensible way forward that the work be shared out among this already close-knit group led by the parliament-savvy Henry Halliday and reporting to Joan. General meetings would be called from time to time to review progress. All press matters would be referred to Joan, who would speak for the project.
It was only left for the ‘Estate Group’ to share out their workload and it was decided to leave this until the following Tuesday, when they came back from what was going to be a long weekend in their constituencies. All were
