Thank you for inviting me to make a submission to this Inquiry. I shall focus on the five areas of concern set out in the sub-committee's terms of reference.

1. THE VALUE, QUALITY AND AFFORDABILITY OF ALLOTMENTS

  The value, quality and affordability of allotments is bound up with a range of issues, of which the actual annual rental cost of a plot is only a relatively minor consideration. The English Allotments Survey (1) says that the average rent is £22 per annum, for a standard 10 pole plot. Rental levels often depend on the facilities provided, but on a site where there has been sufficient and consistent investment £22 is good value.

  The real issues are:

(i)   Investment Does the site have water? Thirty-five per cent still do not; (2) are other facilities provided? e.g., sheds (many plot-holders build their own, so this is not essential), is there maintenance of the common area? mowing, ensuring the paths and tracks are robust enough to enable deliveries of manure, etc., are toilets provided? are there other facilities? cycle storage racks, safe play space/equipment for children?

(ii)   Security If the site is not secure its value is drastically reduced. It is by no means unknown for thieves to come in at dawn and lift entire plot full of potatoes, onions etc., and sell them in markets.

The loss of a whole crop hardly makes a plot value for money. Petty vandalism is almost as bad, breaking into sheds, stealing tools, breaking cold frames, etc., is very disheartening and expensive.

A site that is not virtually vandal-proof will soon lose plot-holders and a cycle of decline, reduced investment and dereliction follows. Sites overlooked by houses are much safer than ones where nobody is around in the normal course of events.

(iii)   Accessibility Sites need to be near where people who want to have a plot are, and they need to be accessible on foot, cycle, by public transport and occasionally by car. Ideally an allotment site should be walking distance (or wheel barrow pushing distance) of home. This tends to suggest that a good spread of small sites rather than a few larger ones is preferable (also more convivial—plot-holders are more likely to know each other and to challenge strangers).

2. THE EXTENT OF INTEREST IN ALLOTMENT CULTIVATION

  The question is interest in what? Allotments do have an image problem, and for good reason. Local associations can be very insular, and unwilling to accept new members. New members may challenge both stereotype and reality of the typical plot-holder and committees may feel threatened by newcomers. This is certainly my experience. The committee of the site I was on from 1983-87 gave me constant hassle about bringing friends on to help, growing "strange" vegetables, even having a compost heap and paths between rows of vegetables.

  Racism can be a problem. When I first arrived on that plot I was welcomed (being white) and told that I was a great improvement on the previous tenant who was "a blackie who had poisoned the ground". Women plot-holders are still treated with suspicion in some places, and families (i.e., the children) are often discouraged.

  If in practice allotments are confined to white males over 55 it's no surprise that interest seems limited. On the other hand sites like the one I am now on which go out of their way to encourage families (there are 28 children on the site which is very small with less than 30 plots) are full. The site I am on grassed over a plot a few years ago and bought for £100 a whole set of outdoor play equipment from a pub that was closing down.

Parents and children love it. There is a long waiting list for plots.

  In these days of longer working weeks and competing leisure interests a 10 pole plot is often too big. A half or a quarter of that is often quite sufficient. Ten poles is a deterrent to people with other commitments.

  What are allotments used for? Strictly, the answer is consumption of fruit and vegetables by the plot-holder's household. This will and should remain the main function, however I know of three restaurants in Oxford which grow a significant quantity of the vegetables they use, on local plots. This is very sensible. The food is local and fresh, and the land would otherwise be derelict (none of the sites are full). I also believe people should be allowed to sell surpluses. To some extent this happens already with organic food being traded on LETS schemes (I do it myself), and an organisation like Restore which cultivates three acres of the Elder Stubbs site in Oxford (which I am a trustee of) has established an organic vegetable "box scheme" for the locality. Restore (3) which assists in the re-habilitation of people recovering from mental illness and has a major partnership with Elder Stubbs is another innovative example of ways to use allotments productively. Their presence is year-round and involves about 20 people on site every day—much welcomed by other plot-holders as their presence reduces vandalism.

  Organic food production is becoming much more popular after all the recent health scares and an increasing recognition of "sustainability" issues and this is leading to a revival of interest in allotment cultivation. Building on this latent interest the Henry Doubleday Research Association (HDRA) is launching a high profile "Grow your own organic fruit and vegetables" campaign this spring.

3. THE EFFICIENT USE OF ALLOTMENT LAND

  Not all allotment sites are very suitable. Some are too steep, too boggy, too near main roads (pollution problems and risk of vandalism) or too polluted (Cripley meadow in Oxford has gone into serious decline since collectors of Victorian bottles disturbed the soil and brought 19th century pollutants to the surface). Many lack investment. This becomes a vicious circle; insufficient investment—poor security—abandoned plots—fewer plot-holders—the temptation to sell off the land for other uses. Addressing the points in (1) and (2) above will certainly lead to the more efficient use of allotment land. Nevertheless some sites, or parts of some sites may now be unsuitable as allotments—even if they weren't 50 years ago. They should be rationalised, and if sold the money re-invested in the rest of the site or other sites. This is what we have done on the Elder Stubbs site, selling 1.8 acres of the 16 acre site for housing for over £1.3 million last year. The income this gives us to re-invest on the site and related community projects is substantial as well as providing over £360,000 to Oxford City Council for social housing locally as part of the planning agreement.

4. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF STATUTORY PROTECTION FOR ALLOTMENT SITES

  By and large permanent allotment sites seem to be adequately protected by statute. The English Allotments Survey (4) reports that statutory sites as a proportion of the total has increased from 50 per cent to 75 per cent in the last 26 years, suggesting the non-statutory sites are the ones disposed of. The fact that statutory protection seems to work in general does not mean that allotments legislation does not need consolidating and updating.

The Allotment Acts of 1908, 1922, 1925 and 1950 are still current and the legislation is confusing to plot-holders and local authorities and can open up opportunities for misinterpretation by people who want to get rid of a site.

Perhaps the distinction between statutory and non-statutory sites needs to be reviewed? The "no commercial use" clauses should be relaxed.

5. THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF BODIES CONCERNED WITH THE PROMOTION, ALLOCATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALLOTMENTS

  There needs to be a radical re-think about the role of allotments in society. They need to be "re-invented" for the 21st century. I want to help start that process by recasting their role in public policy making, and from that allow you to think what the implications for government, national and local, and other agencies might be.

  "Sustainability" is a subject that in various forms is becoming increasingly important. If current proposals to have between 50-75 per cent of the 4.4 million new houses built between now and 2016 in cities is realised, urban allotment land if underused could be under serious threat. This would be tragic. The problem with cities at the moment and the reason why people move away from them is because they are unattractive environments, crime, poverty, poor schools, pollution, inadequate recreational facilities. The "liveable city" needs to tackle all these and investment in infrastructure/urban renewal is essential. Allotments are an important resource in this process. Flats and many new houses in urban areas have tiny gardens or none at all. The recreational needs of the people who live in them, especially children can be well met (as well as by parks) by allotments, safe informal play space where adults can also relax, and grow food too. Sites may be "child free" or "family friendly"—there should be room for both.

  Not every part of a site is suitable for cultivation—informal woodland, long grass, a pond, the stream running through the site, hedges made from wild damson trees ideal for dens and gorging on fruit at the appropriate season allow urban wildlife to thrive and children to thrive too. The Elder Stubbs site has all these things as well as 100+ plots. These spaces can be useful for educational activities too. Local primary schools are regular visitors (so are the Woodcraft Folk). Informal management by local people of these urban wild spaces is part of the whole "Agenda 21" process.

  Some allotments associations are good at Harvest Festivals or similar. It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to turn them into arts festivals as well—shed painting, "best dressed scarecrow", willow sculpture, live music, puppet shows, tea in the woods, animals made from vegetables, a harvest procession of people dressed as vegetables, ("King tomato") all this and a lot more happens every year at Elder Stubbs, and goes some way to making the "liveable city" a reality, and local communities value their allotment sites.

  Another important public policy area is that of public health. The public health Green Paper, according to recent reports (5) will focus on the way poverty produces early deaths. For example deaths from coronary heart disease (CHD) has halved for professional men in the last 25 years, and increased for unskilled men. The three biggest causes of CHD are cholesterol, lack of physical activity and blood pressure. Put another way the reason why unskilled men die so often before they are 65 is because they don't eat fresh fruit and vegetables, and don't exercise enough. The consequences of this is over £4 billion of expenditure on health and social services per annum. Tackling this would not only mean healthier people but a healthier exchequer as well. According to the Observer (6) the Green Paper wants "to ensure access to and availability of a wide range of foods for a healthy diet", and for local authorities to "provide facilities for exercise and relaxation, and decent transport to help people get to them". Does the word "allotments" come to mind?

  It seems to me that DETR, the Department of Health, the new Food Standards Agency, local authorities and health authorities all need, like the HDRA have done already, to put allotments high on their agendas. If they do the future of allotments could be brighter than it has been for over 50 years. I am sure that this inquiry has come at just the right time. Let's not lose the opportunity.

References

(1)   English Allotments Survey, National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners, Anglia Polytechnic University, November 1997, page 10.

(2)   Ibid. page 11.

(3)   Case study is written up on page 70 of "Growing Food in Cities", National Food Alliance, June 1996.

(4)   English Allotments Survey, page 9.

(5)   For example, The Health Services Journal, 23 January 1998.

(6)   The Observer, 25 January 1998.

January 1998