The raft of proposed legislation which has poured from the Government recently has kept planners very busy. At the heart of it has been the Barker report, produced by Kate Barker, a member of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee, which has managed to ruffle a few feathers in the area of land use planning.

Last month, Harry St John from the property agent Cluttons explained why he believed houses should be built on the Oxford Green Belt.

By implication he was also claiming that the current plan of the South East England Regional Assembly was misguided.

Many of his views appeared to be based on and to repeat the conclusions of the 2006 report of Kate Barker to the HM Treasury.

This is unfortunate because much of what Ms Barker had to say about Oxford appears to be based on incomplete or flawed data.

Harry St John quotes Kate Barker as saying that the Green Belt has begun to strangle the "burgeoning 21st century economy".

Indeed, she does say economic growth has been constrained near to Oxford due to tight labour markets and land shortages, particularly in the biotech industry.

However, the facts are different. The Oxfordshire Bioscience Network in its 2005 cluster report says that only one third of local companies have experienced difficulties in finding the right location for their businesses.

And of those two thirds who have experienced no difficulties, 71 per cent find no problem with staff recruitment.

On land use the Barker report says Oxford Science Park is "nearing capacity" and "land restrictions are likely to impede further development". Again, the facts do not support her.

The Oxford Science Park's own website says that after 15 years of growth it still has planning permission for a 63 per cent increase in capacity - a long way from reaching its limit.

At the same time local high-tech industries know there is ample accommodation on the other campuses at Milton Park, Harwell, Begbroke, Upper Heyford, etc.

Another oft-quoted phrase from the Barker report is her claim that current policies lead to large numbers of commuters "jumping" the green belt to get to work.

There is no evidence in her report at all that it is the Green Belt that creates the commuting problem.

All cities are net importers of commuters and Middlesbrough, a similar sized urban centre with no Green Belt to protect it, imports half its total workforce every day. The way to reduce commuting is to reinforce employment opportunities in the county towns and to avoid the over-centralisation of public services such as hospitals.

Another argument put forward by Harry St John is that "it makes more sense" to expand larger settlements which have existing infrastructure and services already in place. Clearly this argument ignores the fact that there is a natural limit to the size of any community before it begins to break up into smaller entities. This limit is determined by the natural constraints imposed by history and geography amongst others.

Oxford has an inflexible mediaeval centre with very few crossings over a complex river system. It is for this reason that transport into the centre of the city is so difficult and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future.

Whilst fast transport remains difficult it seems to be foolish to build yet more housing on the edge of the city, since those communities then become separate, without easy access to central facilities.

The South East England Regional Assembly has proposed a plan which leads to an increase in housing within Oxfordshire from now to 2026 equivalent to the population of Banbury.

This housing can be accommodated sustainably within the county towns without any need to build on the Green Belt.

The Green Belt has served its purpose well for the near 50 years since it was first proposed and the city of Oxford has prospered throughout that time.

It is a guardian, not only of the city but also of the equally valuable conservation areas at Nuneham Courtenay, Toot and Marsh Baldon, Garsington, Forest Hill, Elsfield and Wood Eaton to name only those in south Oxfordshire.

Finally, it is supremely ironic that Harry St John finishes with his question as to whether anyone has the courage and vision to take up Kate Barker's challenge.

It is precisely the qualities of courage and vision that are required to defend the Green Belt against the commercially driven depredations of property developers and land owners.

Building on the Green Belt is always the simplest "solution" to Oxford's problems. The real challenge is to find those qualities of courage and vision to solve the problems in a genuinely sustainable way which will only come through considering the issues of economic growth and land use from a reasoned and objective standpoint.

n Do you feel strongly about a local issue which affects business in Oxfordshire? If so, e-mail business@nqo.com or telephone Business Editor Andrew Smith on 01865 425460.