Local Persons restriction seem a bit racist? Or am I overthinking?

[dartmoorgirl12]

We're house hunting on Dartmoor (clue's in the name!) at the moment, and we've seen a house with a Local Persons restriction on it. You have to live or work in the local or neighbouring parish for the previous five years. We actually qualify, but it got me thinking... Isn't it a bit weird that the "protected" group here are extremely likely to be white/broadly Christian. It just seems really exclusive for 2023. I do understand the idea that local communities should be protected, and that there is absolutely toxic housing pressure in Dartmoor at the moment. But ironically I live down here now because we got royally outpriced in the bit of London I grew up in. And there def doesn't seem to be any move to have Local Persons protections on various parts of London, which have been rapidly gentrified in recent times. I just thought it was interesting. Why is it that this group of white people get protected in this way?

It does seem a bit similar to an anti immigration policy. They could build a wall between the West Country and the UK to keep everyone out. It would stop it being ruined for the locals.

It’s not about groups of people with protected characteristics, it’s about planning and the development plan. Making sure that key workers and those who contribute to the infrastructure of the area have housing.

The economy.

In London the best thing that the Gvt / Mayor could do, IMO, is ban buyers from abroad buying up thousands of flats as investments and never living in them.

Minorities tend to move to wear there will be a minority community, but there always has to be a first. There are plenty of wealthy black and Asian people in UK, mostly centred around London FTB, but they have moved "out" for a better life/cheaper property just like everyone else. Why do you think none of them would go to Dartmoor?

Yes, that's exactly the objection to allowing immigration. People coming here taking jobs, homes, services....

Ok, so I'm thinking this through over the course of this thread. I suppose if you said, here's this house, which is 20% cheaper than the average house in the area and we have a group of people which is 95% white who have a special privilege or right to buy this house over the rest of the population, that would seem weird. But that's actually exactly what the Local Persons thing does.

Broadly Christian makes no sense and you know it! Define it please.

HTH... "collective worship is of a broadly Christian character if it reflects the broad traditions of Christian belief without being distinctive of any particular Christian denomination." www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/40/section/7/enacted

Oh come on, you know exactly what OP means. Christian by heritage, as the vast majority of white British people are.

I think anyone familiar with areas of outstanding natural beauty is familiar with the scourge of holiday homes and buy to let property and how they hollow out communities. I'm not sure that this is the right approach but certainly something has to be done to allow rural and small communities to survive.

Personally, I'd tax second home ownership until it becomes so prohibitively expensive that it's unviable. And ban the construction of more holiday homes.

It's fine, massive swathes of Britain are full of the dead husks of communities, broken apart mainly because the local people stopped being able to afford to live or do business where they grew up.

Be thankful your own area cares enough to do this.

Holiday homes are a problem, but why should someone have the the priveledge of access to the most beautiful parts of the world while others are excluded, just by virtue of having been born there?

Poor sods born in the inner cities should never be allowed out even for a week in a rented cottage?

There's other local issues that internal migration affects, not just the rise in the cost of housing as people from wealthier parts of the UK move to areas that are not as economically dynamic.

My area is slowly becoming a dormitory for people who work in two cities each roughly an hour's drive away.

Traffic, congestion and speeding is now horrific. There are no school places. And these new residents are not remotely invested in civic society. They want it, and complain about it not being there, but they see that is someone else's job to provide Scouts and Brownies for their kids, and quaint events on a weekend, and walking maps, and heritage trails, and all the plantings of the flowers.

They are consumers of local culture and civic society, not creators or producers. And it's starting to put locals' backs up because so much of this work is done by people volunteering their time and services.

And to add insult to injury, they don't respond to surveys when we need response data to apply for funding and grants. Indeed, hardly any of them even bother to vote. And then they will plant yew next to a field of horses and let their dogs poo all over fields.

When my generation is gone, these people, if they haven't moved on, will look around and say "what happened to the area? There's no scouts or duck races anymore. And the war memorial looks scruffy, and there's no daffodils."

And the answer we will whisper from our graves will be: "You happened, my friend. You happened."

Come on, there are barely any Christians in this country, let alone great marauding herds of them in the Dartmoor area. You’re straw manning. It’s a great try, but utterly ridiculous and you know it. You’re basically making shit up to support your weak argument.

They're allowed, for sure, but they'll have to pay. If you can afford more for a holiday home than a local can afford for an actual home so you and people like you buy up all the local housing stock to leave empty for three quarters of the year, how can a local community survive? Local shops, pubs, cafes, schools, medical centres, libraries becoming unviable means decay and desolation for the now stuck and isolated residents, often elderly.

Surely that's more important to fix than making it cheap for someone to have a little holiday?

I live in North Devon, we can’t recruit to so many jobs because housing is so impossible to find. Personally I wouldn’t put a 5 year limit but Something has to happen.

I live in the Cotswolds. The village I grew up in is within commuting distance of three cities. The houses are now so expensive they are only affordable by people who work miles away, in very well-paying jobs. They are out from 7-7 or more. Nobody is around during the day.

They have utterly priced out all the local people who work in regular jobs locally. And then complain that they can’t find childminders, gardeners, mechanics, plumbers, that there’s no shop in the village, the pub can’t get enough staff to open all weekend, that there aren’t any activities in the village for their children.

Communities are a very large part of what makes a place special. These places are turning into commuter dormitories. Local Plan policies can do a lot to address these issues of place making, and should be doing so. Diversity isn’t just about ethnic make up.

But if the existing stock is reserved for people already in work in the local area then you are restricted to people already employed locally for your staff which just shifts the problem to another employer.

It makes more sense to restrict second home ownership/holiday lets but people need to vote for a council which will implement that.

Is this an ex local authority house? Because if it is, that type of restriction on buying them has been in place for years. We bought an ex LA house in Teignbridge district (bordering Dartmoor) in around 2001 with the restriction that buyers had to have resided in Devon for 3 years prior to purchase. These restrictions have been in place since right to buy was introduced.

This is a rich v poor issue, not a race issue. Local people of whatever race who can't afford to compete with second home owners.

There are more expensive, non restricted properties that people of any race can also buy.

I've economically benefited from moving away from the area I was born in. When I move back next year, I'll be taking my high income with, and I don't qualify for local occupancy properties. Fine. I benefited from moving away in a way others didn't.

I don't think race is the primary issue here even if it is a factor, tbh.

I know.

I have middle class black and brown people in my family.

Half of my extended family live in a coastal / rural area very popular with holiday makers and ‘Let’s Move Out if Londoners’. It is an area frequently mentioned by MNers as an idyllic place to go. Many villages have been ruined by the holiday home / middle class work-from-homers and locals cannot afford to stay in the area. Just like Devon, Cornwall, Dartmoor.

All these new buyers are white. I am there for months every year and while holiday visitors are more diverse than they used to be the residents are not. A member of my family has taught in 3 comprehensive schools in the area over the last 5 years and none has a black / brown pupil.

I can’t speak for the reasons people might choose to or not choose to move somewhere, but there are significant levels of racism in the local community.

@Dumahabomubo Not ex local authority, no.

I'm one of those awful Londoners who's moved far out with my dirty London money. I could never afford to save up £50k+ for a London deposit while paying £1,200 a month rent for a two-bedroom house. Should I have stayed renting forever?

@Dumahabomubo And also just because it's a restriction that has been around for years, it doesn't mean it's ok. People used to stick "No Irish" signs in the window when they were letting a place, which is horrific.

This.

OP this isn’t racism, it’s trying to enable locals to stay living in their community without being priced out.

To answer your first question, because displacing large numbers of people from their community and wiping out the culture where they live is one of the most morally wrong things you can do to large groups of people.