CHANGES to the planning rules have come too late according to many residents who have fought to stop development around Swindon.

The guidelines, which have been amended after arguments about their affect on the countryside, include encouraging development on brownfield sites.

They say a “presumption in favour of sustainable development” should be a key theme in planning decisions.

While south Swindon MP Robert Buckland welcomed the changes, campaigners who have recently lost battles to prevent development on the outskirts of Swindon said they sounded hypocritical.

Mr Buckland said: “I met with the minister last week and also wrote to the Prime Minister asking for three particular changes.

“One was development on brown field land.

“From what I see, I am very pleased that the document is now reflecting these considerations.

“Swindon has a lot of countryside that is not green belt or sites of special scientific interest and this proposal could help protect land to the north and west of Swindon.

“We have brownfield sites in Swindon which could be and should be considered for development first.

“We have the issue of sustainable development in Swindon. Development has been good for the town but it has to be sustainable in the future.”

Highworth resident Chris Birdsall, who has fought to prevent the development of a historic field off Pentylands Lane, said the proposals were hypocritical based on personal experience.

He said:“I think what has happened is this act has come unfortunately just a few months too late for us.

“It is very annoying that on the one hand the government is saying we should protect green land and protect our community life, then on the other their very own inspectors went against a decision by our local council and allowed Taylor Wimpey to build on green land in Highworth.

“The trouble is the government tries to say what they think the people want to hear but must think people are very stupid and won’t notice when their promises aren’t followed through.

“This proposal was being discussed last October and yet when it came to our inquiry in November the government inspector still allowed it to go through.”

The rule changes would not have had an impact on the planned development of Coate Water, according to Mr Buckland.

He said: “For the Coate decision this proposal would not have had much impact because it all relates to a decision that was made back in 2003.

“That area was allocated to development before Rod Bluh was made leader of the council.”