Croydon (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Croydon residents south of the Flyover grow weary of Conservative MP Chris Philp’s persistent and slightly shrill email updates, regardless of constituency.
When the shadow home secretary isn’t chasing delivery drivers down the street or counting tiny boats crossing the Channel, he and his state-funded assistants, which include two Tory councillors, Simon Fox and Lynne Hale, seem to enjoy nothing more than showing off how many homes they have prevented from being built in the borough.
It seems as though they are unwilling to accept any additional contributions from wealthy real estate developers.
Additionally, as one might anticipate from Philp (the Grauniad journalist John Crace has called him the “nose in search of a bum”), Croydon Conservatives’ frequent emails are as dependable as an Arfur Daley-sold used car.
Philp sent out “another periodic update of more recent good news on local planning matters” in May, bombarding both fans and critics.
Naturally, he mentioned his collaboration with Mayor Jason Perry and their efforts “to protect family homes and preserve the character of our area.”
Philp’s email said:
“I know many residents share my view that, while some new flats are needed, we should not be destroying family homes, which local families need, or changing the character of green suburbs like ours to build them.
New flats are better suited to places like Croydon town centre, city centres and brownfield sites.” It is the very definition of Nimby-ism.
Local objections to overdevelopment – including mine as our local MP and those of local residents’ associations and councillors as well as individual residents – continue to now be listened to under Mayor Perry’s new planning approach in Croydon.” Did no one teach Philp at his grammar school about split infinitives?”
Philp’s little email campaigns engage in deception by omission in addition to blatant hypocrisy. The fact that the proposed apartment would take the place of a double garage was not mentioned in his email. Like Mayor Perry, Philp must believe that people’s cars are more essential than their homes.
Philp’s email campaign worsens as he searches desperately for something positive to say about the failing mayor of the Tories. Much worse.
There was a proposal to construct “a two/three storey building comprising three self-contained flats” in the back garden of a Purley home, not far from 238 Selsdon Road but still inside Philp’s Croydon South electorate.
As Philp could have said, this was approved with “barely a moment’s consideration.” In fact, neither Croydon’s Nimby-in-chief MP nor any other Not-In-My-Back-Yard Tories lodged a complaint with the council’s planning department.
Because this bit of backyard development was suggested for the back garden of 36 Brighton Road, which just happens to be the office of Croydon Conservatives.
This was Philp, Perry, and their friends’ second attempt to earn some cash from the old family home’s backyard. The council, which was then run by Labour (Philp never brings that up either), and the Planning Inspector, to whom the Conservatives appealed, turned down the initial attempt in 2017.
That shouldn’t stop you from asking MP Philp or Mayor Perry how much money they and their political party have made from building in their own backyard in Purley the next time they bombard your email inbox with claims about preserving our neighborhood’s character and protecting family homes.
What are the most common topics or issues covered in Chris Philp’s emails to local residents?
The most common topics or issues covered in Chris Philp’s emails to Croydon residents primarily revolve around local planning and housing matters. He often updates constituents on efforts to block overdevelopment, particularly opposing the destruction of family homes to make way for flats.
Philp emphasizes protecting the character of neighborhoods, advocating new flats to be located in town centers or brownfield sites rather than green suburbs.
His messaging frequently includes criticism of previous local council planning decisions and highlights victories in safeguarding family homes from intensive development.