New law gives hope to angry gardeners
8:59am Thursday 29th July 2010 in News
A DISGRUNTLED allotment holder is hoping to use a new piece of legislation to force a public inquiry into Bolton Council’s plans to raise rents on plots.
Ian Bullough wants to collect 2,000 signatures on a petition which, under the Local Democracy Economic Development and Construction Act 2009, would require the council’s director of environmental services to appear before a public scrutiny committee and explain the reasoning behind the hike.
Town hall chiefs have told plotholders rents will increase by about £25 from October, meaning the largest plots would jump from £41 to £66 while the smaller plots would face the steepest increases.
Tenants will pay a premium of £5 for access to water and an extra £15 if an on-site toilet is provided.
Mr Bullough says a High Court ruling in 1981 — in which an allotment holder saw rent increases quashed after proving it was not in line with other recreational activities in the borough — gives tenants a basis to mount their own challenge.
Mr Bullough, who has a plot in Sapling Road, said: “We want to try and collect the 2,000 signatures to find out what the council is trying to do with the allotments because such big increases are going to drive people off the plots.
“The council have a legal obligation to provide land for people in this way. The problem they have is that they have 430 people on the waiting list.
“We also want to get a minimum of 10 people to act as plaintiffs in any legal challenge that we could trigger and 4,000 signatures to trigger a full council debate on the subject.”
Bolton Council says that while it did not consult all of the allotment holders, the proposals — alongside those to halve some plots and a “buddying-up” scheme which pairs new tenants with more experienced gardeners — were taken for approval to a group made up of site secretaries.
A council spokesman said: “The council’s policy development group came up with a set of proposals following a review of the allotments provision across the borough. These then went out to consultation with site secretaries via the joint consultative committee and suggestions and comments were taken on board.
“The comments from site secretaries did influence the PDG in terms of the decision not to proceed with some of the proposals originally put forward.”
