In a report released by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) England’s green belts have been labeled as ‘a major obstacle to development’ and went on to say that they should be replaced with ‘land-use restrictions that better reflect environmental designations’ in order to free up land for housing.
Chancellor George Osborne said: ‘On the housing market, the OECD survey identifies the planning system as a major obstacle to the construction of new homes and a more stable housing market.
‘They [OECD] support our abolition of the top-down system that has failed.
‘But they [OECD] also point out that we should do more to make sure housing supply keeps up with demand, for example by making the land-use system more flexible and providing even better incentives for local communities to allow development.
‘I [George Osborne] very much agree.’
This is a worrying development as the Green Belt’s have been an essential element of planning policy (now PPG2) and has remained largely unchanged since 1955. It was set up to and continues to protect public open spaces and recreational areas for people living in urban areas. Removing or weakening this protection to the existing Green Belt will erode these sacrosanct areas reducing the urban dwellers access to the countryside.
landscape architect's pages 
…and what’s the problem with building on greenbelt in the south, where the jobs are? It will lower house prices, and offer the kind of opportunities for internal migration taken for granted in other European countries, Australia, Canada and the U.S.
Much of the landscape supposedly being protected is of low quality, and isn’t accessible to the public in any meaningful sense anyway.