so it's important to do this and to call it greenbelt is not quite right. it's greenbelt. designated as greenbelt. but actually that's what it is. it's not it's not beautiful meadow fields or anything like that . fields or anything like that. >> i think it is as well, because i think you'll find the developers have certainly got their eye on a lot of greenbelt as well. i also think you've got to get the planning rules right, because you have to take everything to appeal. basically, you're going to have real no local democracy anymore and you won't be able to compulsorily purchase anything until you've got planning permission, because you can't say the council can't come along or the government and say we will. compulsory purchase my land, for instance, will be much easier. >> it will be easier, it will be eafien >> but i still think people will challenge those decisions. they will, i mean, having been a local, but you won't be able to drag it out. yeah, but they i still not i mean i wish labour well and i do say this in sincerity with this because i sat on a planning commit

including greenbelt now and so which was obviously it was going to happen at some point, she says, ory say they're concerned that landowners might cash in on the demand. let me answer that. they will, in order to build this number of houses, what we're going to see is the green belts are going to go first, and then then we're going to see bus stops turned into houses and then houses on houses, schools turned into houses, schools turned into houses, hospital operation rooms turned into houses, and soon everything will be a house. >> and if you remove all the belts, the trousers will fall down. >> christa. well, you say this, but some of us would like just one leg of a small pair of trousers. >> i don't know if that's what you this analogy, the analogy, what i'm getting at is, as somebody that's trying to buy their first property, it's a nightmare when there's everything's expensive, there's nothing around. i'd love to see more housing built. >> so i'm like, sort of a generation x boomer. i actually bought my first house when i was 20 years old, so. right now, you know, i'm at the end o

the greenbelt in the great plains, areas of northern maine, parts of appalachia which were once cold country, we are talking about vast parts of the american southwest, they all get labeled rural but they are dramatically different in all kinds of ways. >> how do you define it for the purpose of your book? steven: i very studiously avoid trying to define it. [laughter] one of the things i found interesting when i jumped into the project was that lots of people have been trying to define the term for a long time and no one has come up with a real answer. i think at the end of the day, we know a rural place when we are in one, when we experience it. that is part of the sense i wanted to trade on, we see rural in the country as quiet, largely empty, slower paced. so wherever you find yourself feeling that way, you would probably label that, i am in the countryside, i am in a rural area. peter: no word has been used more consistently to describe rural america than crisis. is that a fair word to use? steven: that is why i started the project. that is what i was reading in the newspapers s

most likely on the greenbelt, most likely in lots of areas that basically, you know, define who we arele like. so until somebody can get real with the british people about the demand side of this problem, which is we've got 6.5 million people coming into this country in the next ten years. that's the government's own forecast, 6.5 million people coming in. that is basically 70% of london. okay. so where are those people going to go? because at the moment we are still playing catch up for the demand of the last ten years. so can someone in government come out and say, here's our plan for the 6.5 million who are coming in between now and 2036. this is where they're going to go, because i don't think allowing people to build loft extensions or building on brownfield sites or building on brownfield sites or whatever is going to come close to dealing with that issue. >> you say as well that we, you know, yes, we can talk about immigration and all we ever do is talk about immigration. but i would say that actually it's becoming increasingly difficult to raise your concerns about the absolute

this is about whether labour will compulsorily purchase greenbelt.en the government should give those holders six months to complete their build or lose their planning permissions and return to square one. it's a very good point. yeah. >> i think what happens is some of the developers get what they call an outline planning permission to build on the land, but they then have to submit detailed applications on the scale. how many and the style. and they never get beyond the outline planning application. and they sit on the land for some years. that's where we are. and labour are saying they're going to now change that. and compulsory purchase the land at cut price. how can they? how can they decide what is the cut price if they just refuse to sell it ? we're price if they just refuse to sell it? we're gonna have a council says you will say it's because we're going to change the law. how does that work? >> this government appears to not feel accountable to anyone. that's the impression that i'm getting. they're acting with absolute impunity . they've go

. >> the greenbelt thing i happened to be, in kent at the weekend , broadstairs in kent. weekend, broadstairslovely around there . >> it's lovely around there. >> it's lovely around there. >> it's lovely around there. >> it's beautiful isn't it? it was interesting. >> massive retail parks. right. and then in between them farmland or grind whatever and not being built on some of it being built on. and you look at it and you think, well this is obviously all going to become one conurbation or whatever, so why don't we just get on with it? i don't know what would be holding them up. and i suspect they're doing that. they're doing a lot of expansion, a lot of building there at the minute. but i look at it and think all this nonsense that people talk about, oh, they're destroying our green belts. green belt doesn't necessarily mean oak trees and rivers. and no, it doesn't. >> i mean, green belts were originally implemented to stop urban sprawl , to stop cities and urban sprawl, to stop cities and towns joining into it. so you have a bit of a buffer zone, because if you don't see green or trees or