I’ll state from the beginning that I think the 30 homes in New Quay should’ve received the go-ahead by Ceredigion’s Development Management Committee. I don’t know who the Councillors are who voted it down but I hope to shame them into changing their minds.

Similar debates raged a few years ago over planning at the old hospital site in Aberaeron. That one is for 20 one-bed homes, all for social rent. The homes in New Quay include 16 one to two-bed flats,10 two-bed semis and 4 three-bed semis, again, all for social rent. These are the kind of homes that are urgently needed for people in Ceredigion on the waiting list, who cannot afford the sky-high private rents and haven’t a hope in hell of buying here.

In New Quay the main argument is about parking loss. This plot of land has been designated for housing for more than a decade. Barcud, the housing association who owns the land, has made accommodation for ample parking spaces. But, since when is it the responsibility of a housing association to provide public parking? Their remit is to build and rent homes for local people. This is a brownfield site, like the Aberaeron one, and the plans are well thought through. These houses and their occupants will be an asset to New Quay.

I read the objections and, although not surprised, I feel indignant at some of the comments in the planning notes. Comments such as “social housing not needed nor appropriate in New Quay.” Really! So where are the people who work in the cafes and souvenir shops, the cleaners and boat tour employees supposed to live? In a town with the “highest number of second homes and residences used as short-term lets” at 26 per cent, homes for people who live in New Quay all year round are exactly what’s needed.

Many of these people have lived in New Quay all their lives.

Ceredigion’s Senior Housing Officer states that “the greatest demand in Ceredigion is for one-bedroom properties.” The Aberaeron and New Quay schemes can make a dent in the demand. So for a few councillors to ruin local people’s aspiration of having a place of their own is disgraceful.

The parking loss for tourists is the main issue on which these councillors said no to the plans. That and lack of public transport. Are these Councillors aware that the T5 which calls into New Quay is about to become a much upgraded service? I’m waiting to receive the full details from Transport forWales. They’re not public yet. But councillors can have a preview, unlike me.

Local passengers have campaigned tirelessly to improve this service, local passengers who are not paid unlike these councillors. They could have stood beside us, could have argued on our behalf and now are using the current bad service as an excuse for turning down this decent proposal. They need to rethink.

I listened to the debate on housing at the Hay Festival. It’s clear that there are actually plenty of houses in this country but as Chris Packham said, “the housing crisis is one of affordability.”

Rosie Pearson from the Community Planning Alliance set out how the UK can solve this housing crisis. In their report ‘Homes For Everyone’ she writes, “You could also use the current housing stock more efficiently; some houses could be refurbished/brought back into use; and buildings could be repurposed for use as homes.” Acknowledging that some new homes are needed, she argues for affordable rental ones, in the right places such as brownfield sites, just like the New Quay plans.

Let’s get them built.