Thin on the ground
Clarke Hayes goes in search of London's promised lands Ivhat, apart from love, can money simply not buy? What much-coveted treasures lie sprinlded about London, half-hidden, close by, but tantalisingly out of reach to those who seek them? I speak of allotments — in theory and in law available to all of us, but in reality pieces of promised land far, far away.
Allotments are seriously in vogue, and now we even have a film, Grow Your Own, to prove it Allotment holders know the simple pleasures, but also the hard work and many frustrations involved in tending a plot; they also know something else: they possess a piece of gold-dust not to be conceded under any circumstances.
A 1969 government survey found that over 75 per cent of allotment holders were married men over the age of 40; women accounted for only 3.2 per cent, married women a mere 1.8 per cent. All gave as their reason for having allotments a love of gardening and a desire to grow better produce than can be bought. Last year the London Assembly published a new survey. Not surprisingly, it found that the demographic had changed substantially — women and young families increasingly to the fore, ethnic minorities of every description a potent force on every allotment site. Interestingly, though, the reasons for urban gardening had changed little — a desire to grow better produce than can be bought, or rather afforded, because organic growing is now the confirmed trend.
And so here's the rub. With the so-called `embourgeoisemenf (is that really a word?) of allotments and, therefore, an ever-growing demand for them, numbers of sites and plots are decreasing. The survey, 'A Lot to Lose: London's disappearing allotments', found that more than 4,300 people across London are on allotment waiting lists, 3,000 more than ten years ago. Thirty-two allotment sites (4.2 per cent) and 1,534 plots (6.9 per cent) had been lost in the capital: the equivalent of 54 football pitches. Discrepancy in the figures points to a worrying trend — that sites are being chipped away at, a handful of plots at a time, a process that is difficult to fight or to stop.
What is striking about the document is its championing of allotments, on grounds of health, the environment, community relations and ethnic diversity (a central theme in Grow 56 THE SPECTATOR 14 July 2007 Your Own). A straw poll on any site will find that holders recognise all these advantages, and value them highly.
And so the waiting lists grow. Average waits are counted in years; Camden warns of a tenyear wait Individual allotment sites, those not council-run, are adopting various strategies from closing their waiting lists altogether, to restricting allocation to those living within a specified distance of the site (usually 2km), to splitting plots in half for new holders.
This last seems a sensible option, because new holders can quickly become overwhelmed, and undermined, by the time involved in keeping a plot. Most sites have strict rules about upkeep, so new holders can find themselves stripped of their plot before they've had a chance to get stuck in. But the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners wants the standard of the ten-rod plot to be maintained Nevertheless, every site will already contain plots that are sub-divided on a private, ad hoc basis.
The writer Deborah Moggach waited nine years for a half-plot from Camden Council on a site near Hampstead Heath. 'I didn't mind, though — the process is truly democratic,' she tells me. 'And I don't think I could have managed a whole plot by myself anyway.
'It's my little piece of heaven on earth,' Moggach continues, tut I'm just the custodian of it for a short time. Allotments in general, well, they're the absolute antithesis of everything I hate about how the world is going — globalisation, the nanny state, commercialisation, the cult of celebrity. Allotments are completely individualistic, eccentric, even anarchic — they're brilliant.'
So what of the future? Well, for all its unequivocal support for allotments, 'A Lot to Lose' is remarkably bereft of firm proposals, legislative teeth or even policy initiatives. There's talk of information sharing between councils to try to direct people toward plots available in outer London, but distance is a significant deterrent where allotments are concerned, as I know from experience.
And as for 'disposal' of sites, the report proves what we all suspect — that even 'statutory' sites (governmentprotected, council-run) are being lost with one flick of a minister's pen. Of the five sites that have fought for survival in the past few years, all have gone — including the high-profile Manor Gardens, smack in the middle of the 2012 Olympic site.
The report suggests that London boroughs compel developers of high-density housing to allocate a portion of land for use as allotments. But this is the best bit. It says: `. . . the new owner should as a matter of corporate social responsibility offer a comparable area of allotment land to compensate plotholders for the loss.' (Italics mine.) What? We should all write to Mr Big Chief Executive of Multinational Property Development plc asking that his company please give us half-anacre of crap land round the back of their multimillion-pound investment for a handful of allotments? Is this a realistic alternative to legislation? Certainly the Green party in London doesn't think so Allotments have their roots in feudalism, but they were enshrined in law by the General Inclosure Act of 1845 in order to provide fresh fruit and vegetables for the 'landless poor' (as well as to keep them out of the pub). In a neat twist of fate, they are now hugely sought after by London's landless rich. But rich or poor, wannabe allotment holders face a long wait.
www.yourlondon.gov.uk: search under allotments www.londonallotments.net National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners, www.nsalg.org.uk The Dig for Victory exhibition in St James's Park, featuring a wartime allot- ment, continues until 30 September
Previous page
