Supplementary memorandum by Friends of
the Forest (COA 33(a))
In addressing the best use of Coalfield Communities
funding within the Forest of Dean District, a basic question that
needs resolution is should the Forest of Dean district be treated
as a deprived area, and should therefore planning activities give
overriding emphasis to economic development?
It is commonly stated, especially by local councillors,
that the Forest of Dean District is a socio-economically deprived
area, requisite of jobs and industry. We had assumed, like many
readers of the local press, that statement was true. Recently,
however, we have had occasion to look at the data sources that
underlie the claim. After reading and analysing these data, our
conclusion is that the statement that the majority of the Forest
District is socio-economically deprived is a myth. It is simply
not true.
The data upon which we have drawn our view come
government released unemployment statistics, the government's
England—Indices of Deprivation By Ward, 2000, and the Forest
of Dean district Council publication—Register of Available
Industrial and Commercial Land and Units, Spring/Summer 2003.
The England—Indices of Deprivation are arranged into eight
domains, covering income, child poverty, unemployment, housing,
health, education, access to services, and a single combined index
of multiple deprivation. The eight indices of deprivation domains
are made up of a combination of 35 separate measures. Most of
these measures, in fact, are measures of income.
The reason why the claim that the "Forest
of Dean District is a deprived area" is a myth is simply
that the indicators do not show it to be so. Of the 8,414 wards
in England, the median ward in the Forest of Dean District comes
out at 4,210th on multiple deprivation. It is difficult to get
more average than that. To define the District as an area of special
need on account of deprivation would mean that half the wards
in England would also have to be areas of special need. That is
a ludicrous use of the phrase "special need". Even at
Ward level, all are outside the 20% of those most deprived in
England, for which the term "possessing special need"
has been coined.
It is particularly ludicrous that the myth should
be propounded that unemployment is a major problem in the District.
With 30 hectares of available space there is no shortage of industrial
and commercial accommodation in the Forest of Dean District. The
surplus does not, however, mean that there is gross unemployment.
Using government produced data, in recent years (2001-03), the
overall unemployment rate in the Forest has been lower than the
national average, with September 2003 showing only 797 (1.6%)
unemployed in the whole of the District. Therefore, any planning
policies which use that claim as their justification are bound
to be built upon sand, and will fail.
Given that many of the measures reported in
the deprivation indices are actually measures of the number of
people in receipt of benefit, an obvious solution would be for
the government to improve the level and take-up of those benefits,
whilst improving skills and retraining for greater flexibility
of employment. This approach would be far more holistically friendly,
rather than trying to introduce new major, environmentally inappropriate
and/or unsustainable industry to the Forest of Dean area that
would degrade it's best and nationally important asset, the Forest
of Dean, and in so doing degrade the quality of life for residents
and visitors alike.
For those who don't trust statistics, a walk
around the Forest of Dean District reveals that property standards
are rising and a number of utilities upgrades are on-going. Rather
than a picture of deprivation and decline, you will see signs
of activity and new hope—of people looking forward to the
future.
|
