Soonaxed.

[Henarar]

Planning permission is quite recent.
In fact if you think about it, building and development was more sympathetic before Planning

when the farmhouse here was built they would have just put the cornerstones down and built in between, no planning or building regs then yet its still here 300 odd years later and its much more in keeping with its surroundings than a lot of what they put up now because its made from its surroundings

 

[robs1]

Did I say it was their fault, just something that needs recognising

1. Deheat the South East through positive economic and planning policies
2. Compel brown site rejuvenation over green field development
3. Revise planning requirements to insist (not just a planning bribe and over rule at construction) more social housing and smaller 2 and 3 bedroom family homes not yield manage "Executive houses"
4. Probably rent caps in urban areas that now majority owned by investors not owner occupiers
5. Accelerate redundant high street shop and office accommodation to higher density flat conversions supported by planning relaxations / tax incentives
6. Overturn the UK obsession with bedroom count rather than M2 evaluations of properties like you see in , say, Germany. A mate in Berlin lives in a super 110m2 2 bedroom flat , that's a fair size house over here
7. Starmer will / should be tempted to create new garden cities . Nothing new under the Sun, I'm a product of Harlow New Town in Essex. Planning would not only consider mixed housing but also integrated facilities such as cycle path networks, medical and educational facilities, 15 minute shopping districts etc . The attractiveness to many (not rural dwellers like us) would be amazing and typically the density of accommodation would be better

The economy / folks sense of a healthy economy is often judged either by retail spend or the increased value of their property. It's daft a bit like quantitative easing just inventing "new" money

Hong Kong, Aleppo , Ukraine were hardly EU associated

I'm helping my two elder Daughters

I bet you haven't read what I wrote to Henraar but you choose to label me a Nimby

This post ? Yes I read it but I'm.not sure that shows you not to be a nimby, the bits about brownfield and conversions of shops are there now, I don't think.trying to claim over population is a problem because of non EU citizens is going to stack up, regardless of where they come from we are overcrowded and pre Brexit the majority came from.the EU had we remained that would have continued

 

[robs1]

subsidy maybe the wrong word but say you have a 10 acre field as it is it would be worth between 60 and 100 grand round here, the Government grants PP on it then whats it worth ? a few million ? the jump in value is down to the government granting PP and the government keeping housing in short supply, so as far as I can see its not much different from a hand out.

I don't think the government is responsible for the housing shortage, just near me there is permission for at least two thousand within a couple of miles and many more within five, the builders won't build them

 

[Henarar]

I don't think the government is responsible for the housing shortage, just near me there is permission for at least two thousand within a couple of miles and many more within five, the builders won't build them

If there was no PP those sights would not be needed just build somewhere else, anywhere

 

[JP1]

This post ? Yes I read it but I'm.not sure that shows you not to be a nimby, the bits about brownfield and conversions of shops are there now, I don't think.trying to claim over population is a problem because of non EU citizens is going to stack up, regardless of where they come from we are overcrowded and pre Brexit the majority came from.the EU had we remained that would have continued

I recognise you may have read but not understood or wished to understand

I'm up at 330 in the morning so I'm leaving this now as I've one post to make about the magnificent Alan Bates at the Horizon IT enquiry today

 

[robs1]

If there was no PP those sights would not be needed just build somewhere else, anywhere

But the big national.buliders don't want huge numbers nor do they want to get rid of pp, they would lose millions from the loss in value from their land banks, there shareholders would crucify the board members

 

[Henarar]

But the big national.buliders don't want huge numbers nor do they want to get rid of pp, they would lose millions from the loss in value from their land banks, there shareholders would crucify the board members

I didn't say they did but if there was no such thing as PP there would be no point in them sitting on land as anyone that wanted a house could go to anyone with land and buy a plot and have a house put up.
Its gov rules/policy that cause the shortage, if there was no shortage prices would fall.

 

[essex man]

I don't think the government is responsible for the housing shortage, just near me there is permission for at least two thousand within a couple of miles and many more within five, the builders won't build them

The government is responsible for policies that have created a cartel of large housebuilders who control the market.
They restrict supply and welcome regulations which hinder new entrants to the market.
The government cpuld deregulate house building and planning and see a massive increase in supply and affordability for the young.
They don't do this because prices will fall and this would be unpopular with the majority.
A fall in prices ushered in new labour.
A fall in prices ushered them out.
No government will deliberately make house prices fall.
On the contrary, They do everything they can to make them go up.
It's democracy at its finest.

 

[Charlie Gill]

 

[essex man]

View attachment 1177269

"Miserly" ... hilarious!
Bloated, inefficient, run for benefit of its employees and dependency breeding....my substitute description

 

[Charlie Gill]

"Miserly" ... hilarious!
Bloated, inefficient, run for benefit of its employees and dependency breeding....my substitute description

It can be all you say and be worse than others.

 

[ollie989898]

Government is going hard after the unemployed/long term sick. GPs no longer to be involved in signing people off long term sick etc. Reckon this might be the final nail into the coffin of the Conservative party myself.

 

[DaveGrohl]

View attachment 1177269

Austerity? Seriously?

 

[Charlie Gill]

Austerity? Seriously?

I suppose not if you are in the VIP lane.

 

[Charlie Gill]

Government is going hard after the unemployed/long term sick. GPs no longer to be involved in signing people off long term sick etc. Reckon this might be the final nail into the coffin of the Conservative party myself.

Yeah but Angela Rayner.

 

[ollie989898]

Yeah but Angela Rayner.

Can't see that will make any odds.

 

[Charlie Gill]

Can't see that will make any odds.

It won't but if you can keep people focusing on Ange' they may not notice Infosys or Serco being awarded the contract to hand out sick notes.

 

[ollie989898]

It won't but if you can keep people focusing on Ange' they may not notice Infosys or Serco being awarded the contract to hand out sick notes.

If I was working as a GP I would want as little as possible to do with it as possible. Same as working as a disability/long term incapacity benefit assessor. Thankless task . No thanks.

 

[Charlie Gill]

If I was working as a GP I would want as little as possible to do with it as possible. Same as working as a disability/long term incapacity benefit assessor. Thankless task . No thanks.

Surely the doc is there to fix you with all he's got in the toolbox, if he can't fix you he gives you a sick note. I don't see how you can sub this out.

 

[ollie989898]

Surely the doc is there to fix you with all he's got in the toolbox, if he can't fix you he gives you a sick note. I don't see how you can sub this out.

The health service needs to radically reign it's aspirations in if you ask me- there isn't the resources to do all of this stuff, it has overextended itself and become the default option in trying to solve all of society's ills. It's not an extension of social services or a temporary accommodation provider. I can see why they want to take this out of the hands of general practice. As I said, I wouldn't be fighting to stop them.