Whilst I don't agree with everything stated in your blog article, I am increasingly dismayed by the direction of events from CLG. Certain phrases ('sustainable development' for one) are obviously a cloak for a laissez faire development ideology (not strategy!). Even localism is a cloak - when push comes to shove local communities will not be allowed to block development when, for a start, house building rates wont have significantly improved over the next couple of years. It would be different if a measurable definition of sustainable development were possible but it's not. It doesn't help that the phrase is an oxymoron. For me, the problem is trying to use a single phrase to encapsulate the path we need to take through all the complexities of the interactions between economies, societies and environments, at the heart of which are billions of individual human beings with free will. We are still a long way from properly understanding these complexities and, consequently, a long way from properly understanding the problems and solutions. The way 'sustainable development' is bandied about you'd think the problems and solutions have been clearly and unambiguously defined already.
