Defiant Brits living on the frontline of Labour’s ‘war on rural England’ have mounted a furious defence after Angela Rayner unveiled the biggest shake-up of planning rules for a generation last week.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and his deputy Ms Rayner’s ‘bulldozer blitz’ has laid bare the scale of the demands which will be burdened on local authorities across the country.

Labour have unveiled a major overhaul after Ms Rayner vowed to rip up the ‘broken’ planning system in a move that will prevent so-called Nimbys blocking developments.

Residents across the UK are bracing themselves for drastic changes as the Government scrambles to meet its pledge of building 1.5million new homes by the next election.

The housing shake-up will see councils given ambitious targets to deliver 370,000 homes a year in England. 

The updated national planning policy framework (NPPF) will see disused sites that have already been developed in the past prioritised for new building. But councils will also be required to review green belt boundaries to meet targets by identifying lower quality ‘grey belt’ land that could be used for developments.

Shadow Housing Secretary Kevin Hollinrake last week accused Labour of trying to ‘bulldoze through the concerns of local communities’ and claimed the Government were waging ‘war on rural England’.

MailOnline has spoken to residents in parts of the country where housing targets have dramatically increased, with many reacting angrily to Labour’s radical housing plans. 

One pocket of the country which will see huge changes is Cornwall. The south-west county must build 4,421 homes under Labour’s target, up from 2,707 using the old method and more than the 2,650 homes built, on average, in recent years.

Cornwall councillor Jenny Cruse said Labour’s proposed target was ‘undemocratic’, arguing the priority should be bringing 2,700 empty homes back into use before building new homes on unspoiled land.

She said: ‘Angela Rayner is mad if she thinks this will work, she hasn’t got a clue. What they are proposing isn’t democratic, it doesn’t align with our local plan.

‘I can’t believe how worried and stressed people are about this, we are being totally disregarded.

‘People really care about our area but I don’t think Angela Rayner even knows where Cornwall is. 

‘They are saying to us it doesn’t matter what local communities think, we are going to make the decision anyway and people don’t matter.

‘This is a Marxist plot and I can’t believe we have sleepwalked into this. It’s not about being a NIMBY, it’s that everything they are doing is flying in the face of democracy.’

Residents in Bodmin, one of the oldest towns in Cornwall, are currently fighting an application to build 540 new homes on Halgavor Moor, a floodplain at the edge of the town.

It has attracted 361 letters of opposition but locals say they fear Labour’s target will undermine objections and allow developers to force through many similar applications.

Retired police officer Jeff Kirk, 55, said: ‘I’m not happy with the target. It’s just a disgrace.

‘Certainly we need new homes but there is always a right place and a wrong place to put them.

‘It’s not as if Bodmin isn’t building new homes. It is. But roads around here are already gridlocked and people can’t get appointments to see their doctor.

‘I don’t think the local health services or the police are capable of dealing with that many more people.’

And retired ballroom dance teacher Christine Howard, 80, who has lived in Bodmin for 16 years, said: ‘I was appalled when I heard about the target. I felt like the rug had been pulled from under us, it is just completely lacking any democracy.

‘The fact Labour can override and ignore local residents like this is so upsetting. If this happens developers will do exactly what they like.’

Jack Stevenson, a landlord and retired engineer, said: ‘A housing target won’t work because the finances aren’t there to back it up.

‘Nobody tells you what an affordable house and I don’t see how you can build houses if people can afford.

‘Nobody in Bodmin is saying we need houses on this site, people cannot believe they want to build on that.

‘It’s just going to be a cul-de-sac development with no facilities.

‘You can’t always see the water and it looks like you’re walking on grass but the water table is so high.’

Labour say the plans will help more people get on the housing ladder, make homes more affordable and reduce the 1.3million households on social housing waiting lists.

Despite councils expressing serious concern over the government’s position, the Prime Minister has warned that he is ‘absolutely’ willing to force through planning decisions regardless of opposition and ‘blockers’ to reach his target.

Campaigners say Labour’s policy is ‘confused’ and shows they ‘haven’t understood planning at all’.

Despite fierce backlash, Sir Keir has also warned environmental and countryside campaigners he would prioritise ‘human beings wanting to have a house’ over Britain’s green spaces with his plans to build on the greenbelt.

The target for the total number of new homes per year in England has been set at exactly 370,408, of which 87,992 (24%) are in London, 70,681 (19%) are in the south-east and 45,429 (12%) are in eastern England.

But residents across southern Hampshire, a major target for Labour’s housebuilding, believe the government have conjured up an unnecessary plan.

In Portsmouth, where the city council could be told to build 1,098 new homes-a-year under Labour’s new target, up from 897, locals told MailOnline of their frustration why more homes need to be built when there are thousands of empty properties lining their streets.

Dennis David, who used to work in Royal Navy armaments, cited figures from estate agents Belvoir! who say a whopping 3,015 homes sit empty in the city.

Speaking to MailOnline on Commercial Road, the high street in the port city, he said: ‘Go from that end of the high street, all the way down to the station, it’s all empty, it’s appalling. All these units above the shops are empty.

‘There is a snooker hall that’s been closed 18 years, empty, all the facilities. There are plenty of places to turn into homes.

‘Someone needs to go round these 3,015 properties and if they’re empty for longer than two years they should be able to compulsory purchase it or up their council tax a lot more. That’s proactive.

‘Labour’s policy of getting things moving is a good idea, people need houses, but they should want to utilise the brownfield sites more in the city. It’s absolutely disgusting they’re not doing anything.

‘They [the government] need to get out of the office, outside the box and get people into the city and start planning things. They are very complacent the city council. There is no pressure, they are not moving.’

Mr David also expressed frustration at the quality of the developments going up in Portsmouth and nationally, demanding a total rethink of housebuilding, adding: ‘Everything needs to be looked at. Putting buildings up to last 30 years? That’s ridiculous. It’s absolute rubbish.’

Pointing to a boarded up storefront on Commercial Road, Al Colwell agreed with Mr David’s argument.

The 76-year-old noted: ‘That’s been empty for ten years, don’t you think converting just a quarter of it is better than nothing?

‘They’re not getting no rent for that, it’s going to pieces. I don’t understand why they let it happen.’

Efforts have been made in the city, with the old Debenhams department store on Commercial Road being turned into flats.

But locals say this needs to happen everywhere if Britain is to get a grip on its housing crisis – especially if the high street is dying off.

Tommy, who was working on a stall selling Christmas trees and flowers on Commercial Road, agreed and said more social housing needs to be built above shops and along ailing high streets.

He said: ‘There could be loads of social housing but they don’t want to put their hands in their pocket.

‘Money isn’t going to the right places. Go to a city like Bristol it’s developed, it’s modern, they’ve got a lot more in cities like that for people.

‘Here it just seems like they’re doing the same thing aimlessly developing already modern shops because there is nothing for them to utilise.

‘A lot of people coming from other countries are getting more than people who are homeless and need it. We need it as well. They come here, a strange country to them, and they get what they want for whatever reason.’

Michael, 36, was busking on the high street when he told MailOnline he’s been a victim of the housing crisis.

‘I’m homeless, I’ve been on the street since 13’, he said, and, pointing to a Husky dog on a rug, added: ‘That is my only family and house – how do I get by?’

He said it is people like him that have been massively let down by the state and despite decades of promises for more homes, not enough has been done to offer dynamic solutions to housing the population.

Central to Labour’s promise is that the policy will make housing more affordable.

But when asked by the BBC’s Laura Kuennssberg if the government wanted house prices to fall, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said it was ‘not necessarily about house prices coming down’ but rather ‘about supply and making sure those houses are there so people can afford them’.

The policy, Caroline Dibden argues, is ‘confused’ and shows Labour ‘haven’t understood planning at all’.

Mrs Dibden, who co-founded the Community Planning Alliance and sits as vice President of the Campaign to Protect Rural England in Hampshire, told MailOnline such a position threatens to push homeowners into negative equity, which is when your property becomes worth less than the remaining value of your mortgage.

She explained: ‘They are talking about making housing more affordable, but the current proposals will let the volume housebuilders build more expensive car-dependent housing in the countryside.

‘It won’t be more affordable for young people at all. It won’t help with home ownership or affordability without measures to prevent all those millions of new homes being used as 2nd homes, Airbnbs, or investor rental properties – there are no policies proposed for this.

‘And there are no plans to force developers to include low price housing in the mix, based on local incomes – it is mentioned in grey belt but nowhere else.

‘And there is no help for councils to build low price housing themselves – which needs funding. And they need to insist that developers build out existing permissions – use it or lose it!

‘There are already over a million sites with permission that the developers are not building, as they are waiting for demand to rise.

‘The last time we built over 300,000 per annum was in 1969 – the same year we landed on the moon. And of the 307,000 built then, 136,000 were council houses.’

In nearby Fareham, Labour’s new plans would require the local Tory-controlled council to build 794 new houses – up from a target of 498 when calculated by the current method.

The town is set to have a 1,200 homes built on agricultural land south of Longfield Avenue.

The development – which is yet to be greenlit – includes provision for a new 80-bed care home, primary school and early years infrastructure, a new local centre, community centre, healthcare facility, a new sports pitch hub with changing rooms and a new country park.

But the proposals will turn the area into a ‘cesspit’ with elderly people ‘dying’, Conservative councillor Jacquie Needham said, arguing it will put enormous strain on already struggling local health services.

Rhonda, whose family lives opposite an earmarked development, warned: ‘I’ve noticed a rapid rise in the population. This government are underestimating the intelligence of local people.

‘It’s going to happen where people are going to start protesting.’

She blamed an increase in wildlife deaths – specifically deer – on the increase of the town into the countryside.

Speaking on Fareham’s high street, Robert Pickering added: ‘It’s not that we don’t have enough houses, and housing is important, but not where they manipulate green areas.

‘They need to be a bit more considerate and not overload the services with these new developments.

‘Labour was in opposition for 14 years, they had all that time to look at the issues and they have come in and harmed the economy and don’t have a clue what they’re doing.’

His wife, Stacey, agreed, adding: ‘All these developments have to have a certain amount of social housing but who is this going to be given to?

‘I’ve got friends that are living in a two-bed house with four kids, they’ve got no hope.’

Portsmouth City Council and Fareham Council were approached for comment.

Meanwhile, we also spoke to residents in North Yorkshire where another 4,232 new homes could be built.

That is up from the 1,361 homes under the current target, although an average of 3,150 new homes were built annually across 2020/21 and 2022/23. 

Residents of the North Yorkshire market town of Malton fear Labour’s green light to housing will allow a controversial development of more than 600 homes to be bulldozed through.

Many fear the the £72million development – on green fields and one of the biggest ever in Malton and its sister town of Norton – will be the final blow to its creaking infrastructure.

Some residents are still mopping up after heavy rain sent raw sewage bubbling into their back gardens from the overloaded Victorian drains.

There are long queues for appointments at the town’s only surgery while patients have to travel miles to see a dentist.

Local schools are also crammed to bursting and although there is space on the development site for a new one, locals fear it may never be built.

Mark Griffiths, 73 and born and bred in Norton, said: ‘The biggest problems will be traffic, providing the infrastructure for thee houses such as sewer systems.

‘The number of houses is far in excess for what is necessary or needed. We need more social housing for sure.

‘But I think because of where it will be located with will create a lot of problems, mainly traffic and all the extra pollution caused by traffic.

‘We already have traffic problems in the town. Traffic is the number one issue. Obviously it is an important place for me and part of my heritage.

‘It hurts me to see the planning system not being utilised properly. This development is far too many houses.’

Ken McIntyre, 85, who has lived in Malton 25 years, said: ‘I know we need houses. My concern is we need access from the estate to the A64 because we cannot cope with any more traffic through the town.

‘Traffic is choking the town completely. We are touching wood at the moment with the sewage. They have a lot of problems just the other side of the street and this will add to the pressure.

‘The sewage system around Malton and Norton may not be up to scratch to cope with these 645 houses.

‘More housing is good but they need to put the infrastructure in that will cope with such an influx.’

Sarah Drake, 50, added: ‘I did not even know it was going ahead. It will be a nightmare. There is a one way system by Asda that has led to a load of traffic.

‘They need to sort out the roads before they start building any more houses. GPs services and schools are stretched. There is congestion already.

‘Surely they will not go ahead until they sort out the roads?

‘It is a nightmare. A new road needs to happen first. Three is land for a new school but when that will happen no one knows.

‘The doctors surgery is already rammed and it is difficult to see a GP and there is no dentist so the more people come in the more problems there are.’

June Frank, who has lived in Malton for 30 years, said: ‘When I first came here there were horses from the stables came down here and it was a residential street. It has got worse and worse.

‘The amount of traffic now is ridiculous. There is not even any sort of pedestrian crossing in the street and the speed the traffic comes up and down.

‘I live on St Nicholas Street which is probably the busiest street in town. It is not long since a car crashed through the gates of a house up the street.

‘It is only the parked cars stopping the traffic going even faster. When there are no cars parked they absolutely go like hell because it is a straight piece of road.’

Paul Corcoran added: ‘If they do it correctly it would be fine. But I have got a feeling they won’t and there will be planning change.

‘They will say they cannot afford to build so many affordable homes and the rest will just be sold to the highest bidder.’

And Frank Harrison, 72, said: ‘Our Victorian drains will be overwhelmed unless they improve the system before they build the houses.

‘I have been flooded out twice in 1999 and 2000 when the whole two flooded twice. They want to get the drains updated.

‘It cannot cope already and some people have sewage in their back gardens. Just this last week the water has been so high because the drains cannot cope.

‘They are planning more than 600 houses and how many people are going to be in each house? They also need a new doctors surgery because the surgery here cannot cope as it is.’

Jonpaul Mclatchie, 49, said: ‘They need another’s doctors surgery. Only a small percentage of the house will be social housing so all the people who are homeless will still be homeless.

‘They say they are going to get people off the streets and they will not really. The site is in a flood zone anyway. Schools and doctors will be overstretched.

‘The town is getting too big too fast. It is already overcrowded and there is only one bloody doctors’ surgery in the whole town.’

Lauren Kirby, 24, agreed, adding: ‘The town is drowning in traffic and they always seem to be digging up the roads which makes it worse.

‘If people need a dentist they have to travel miles to Pickering, York or Scarborough. This development will not be helping the homeless. Most of the homes will be sold to the highest bidder.’

Norton Mayor Di Keal is one of the few MailOnline spoke to backing the plan.

She said: ‘I do want this estate because we need housing in Malton and Norton just as we need housing anywhere in the country.

‘It will bring other benefits – a much needed link road that will improve congestion and I hope it will bring developer contributions towards flood alleviation.

‘The vast majority of people who have come to live here are working people who need housing as much as anyone else.

‘It is most definitely not about housing immigrants. There is big pressure on the GP surgery which is oversubscribed.

‘There is land on the site for an additional school but whether it will happen or not I don’t know because I understand school rolls are falling.’

The new development near Norton Lodge is by national house builders Barratt and Taylor Wimpey.

The development proposals will deliver circa 600 homes, a new primary school, a new link road, public open space, green networks and enhanced boundary landscaping.

They say in the planning application the benefits will bring a raft of benefits including affordable housing, improved infrastructure, capital expenditure of £72.7million and jobs to the area. 

Sir Keir has said he will prioritise ‘human beings wanting to have a house’ over the environment as he joined Ms Rayner on a visit to a building site in Cambridgeshire last week.

‘The starting point is local plans, and that’s really important for councils to develop the plan according to the target, taking into account local need and working with developers,’ the PM said.

‘But are we going to push it through if those plans don’t work? Yes we absolutely are.

‘Are we going to push away the planning rules and make them clearer, as we have done today, get away the blockers that are stopping the houses being built? Yes, we are absolutely intent.

‘For years, we have had not enough houses being built. That means that individuals and families don’t have the security that they want. We are determined to break through that, to do what’s necessary.

‘Of course we want to get the balance right with nature and the environment, but if it comes to a human being wanting to have a house for them and their family, that has to be the top priority.’

Mr Hollinrake said he ‘welcomed’ the target of 1.5million homes, but added: ‘What we do not welcome is the war on rural England he is pursuing.’