Justin Haque, UKIP ­parliamentary candidate for Totnes, of Slapton, writes: Further to your article covering Modbury First's attempt to oppose the 93 new homes ­proposed for the town, Gazette, January 30, it seems extraordinary that the district council receives Westminster guidelines on house construction ­targets and then trebles them. Modbury's initial target was 20-30 homes, and now the ­residents are having to fight a proposal for 93. The same happened in Dartington: the initial target was the same and, after fierce opposition, 63 new homes, most of which are not 'affordable housing', were agreed. The same argument is happening in all villages across our county. Given that 60 per cent of South Hams' business revenues come from tourism, it seems that the council's efforts to ­suburbanise our beautiful and unique countryside is at complete odds with us residents, who it technically represents. The South Hams Council argues about a shortage of revenue, and admittedly, the council receives up to £31,000 per new house. However, this is a one-off payment, and while there is council tax to be collected once those houses are sold, the ­villages are changed forever. Instead, if South Hams Council was to impose full council tax on second homes across the county, there would be multiple benefits for all. The council's annual revenues would increase dramatically, the residents would not feel that they are subsidising all second-home owners who enjoy a 50 per cent discount on their ­council tax, and it might even free up some homes in villages that are almost entirely in the domain of second homes and holidaymakers. In short, the district council would then not need to allow so much building and upset all the people who live and work here, while still benefiting from higher revenues.