Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
Yes words do have shared meanings, but words about an individual do not. That's when we get into basic manners. If I want to be called Bart and you keep calling me Joseph, then to me that's just rude. If I call you kirk and you say I'd rather be called algar, and I continue to call you kirk, then that's just me being rude.
If somebody wants to be called "them" which is a third party singular word anyway, then what's the bloody harm in calling them by what they want to be called?
Thanks. Words about an individual have shared meanings. Each individual has a finite range of terms which pick them out as an individual which holds good for the world as a whole ('Pope Francis' for example, but Francis or Frank will do for his family, but Billy won't do the trick). Pronouns are not proper names but generic. Unless there are shared rules about how they work, then ordinary language becomes a place of power play and manipulation.
If they're generic, then what's the harm in people choosing the generic term they prefer and leaving that choice up to them and treating them with respect?
The other day I met a new colleague who was introduced by his first name and he corrected and said he doesn't go by that name, he goes by his middle name. So from then on everyone has called him by his middle name - not unusual, I know many people who do that.
Should we not do that in your eyes, should we insist on calling him by his proper first name?
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
Yes words do have shared meanings, but words about an individual do not. That's when we get into basic manners. If I want to be called Bart and you keep calling me Joseph, then to me that's just rude. If I call you kirk and you say I'd rather be called algar, and I continue to call you kirk, then that's just me being rude.
If somebody wants to be called "them" which is a third party singular word anyway, then what's the bloody harm in calling them by what they want to be called?
And where does 'courtesy and respect' come into Musk's actions, which is where we kicked off ?
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
Musky Baby being the champion of free speech once more.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
Rome was pretty squalid, when I was there recently - the treatment of ruins and ancient monuments was public neglect behind fences. Piles of garbage seemed to be the theme.
The Monumento Nazionale a Vittorio Emanuele II needs dynamiting.
After a while such public monstrosities become untouchable. See also the National Theatre on Southbank.
(I sometimes wonder if visitors to Salisbury in the latter part of the 13th century moaned about the new Gothic monstrosity erected to replace the lovely old Romanesque cathedral up on the hill.)
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
I often wonder whether people who make comments like this are more likely to be on the left.
why have the National Trust removed the sapling at the Hadrians Wall site?
They will want to do something, but would want to use specimen trees and plan carefully with public consultation - which seems reasonable given the site.
Personally I'd go for more extensive planting on one or more sides, to give a different special landscape and approach, but with the gap with a new single tree visible above the forest on the slopes.
I'd probably also do some art-in-the-landscape, which can work very well.
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
Yes words do have shared meanings, but words about an individual do not. That's when we get into basic manners. If I want to be called Bart and you keep calling me Joseph, then to me that's just rude. If I call you kirk and you say I'd rather be called algar, and I continue to call you kirk, then that's just me being rude.
If somebody wants to be called "them" which is a third party singular word anyway, then what's the bloody harm in calling them by what they want to be called?
Why, when you are speaking to someone, would you address them using pronouns? Seems bloody rude to me
By the same token, when they are not present what business is it of theirs to police or compel your language?
I am currently doing a lot of work relating to Asia. The names used are often very unfamiliar to me. So I use either the name or "They" - to avoid making assumptions - in discussion or correspondence, which works perfectly fine.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
I often wonder whether people who make comments like this are more likely to be on the left.
Fellas, is it woke to maintain municipal flower beds?
Who are this weird breed of people Sunak calls ‘the motorists’? Does he mean anyone who drives sometimes, i.e cyclists, pedestrians and aviators?
To be a motorist, you require string backed driving gloves, a pine rear view mirror air freshener, and a tin of travel sweets in the glove compartment.
Just sometimes driving a car simply isn't sufficient.
As a child, the car ashtray was always full of blackcurrant pastilles.
Sadly, since, Rowntree have withdrawn the blackcurrant-only rolls, and then made the recipe vegan, fucking up both the taste and the texture. Oh, and they cancelled tooty-fruities. Arseholes.
Put them in chains with the Mars corporation for cancelling Bounty Dark.
They've killed dark chocolate Bountys? Bastards.
That's up there with Morrisons cancelling Grape Nuts.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
I often wonder whether people who make comments like this are more likely to be on the left.
Fellas, is it woke to maintain municipal flower beds?
Of course it is, Rishi wants an extra lane of traffic there.
I mean, he's not paying or anything, but he wants it.
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
I don't think this particular issue is one of compulsion, though. It's a question of Elon Musk not even allowing people to state their preference. That goes beyond discourtesy and verges on megalomania.
Yes. It's not even whether it would be rude not to use these pronouns on Elon Musk's fascist-friendly plaything. He isn't even letting people use their bio to ask.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Local government simply doesnt have the freedom to act, nor the ability to raise funds, nor the constitutional protection that is normal on most of the continent.
Just look at this latest Tory manouvre over 20 mph speed limits - in most of Europe the idea that central government could or should mandate what councils can or can’t do on an obviously local issue like this would provoke outrage.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
Who are this weird breed of people Sunak calls ‘the motorists’? Does he mean anyone who drives sometimes, i.e cyclists, pedestrians and aviators?
To be a motorist, you require string backed driving gloves, a pine rear view mirror air freshener, and a tin of travel sweets in the glove compartment.
Just sometimes driving a car simply isn't sufficient.
As a child, the car ashtray was always full of blackcurrant pastilles.
Sadly, since, Rowntree have withdrawn the blackcurrant-only rolls, and then made the recipe vegan, fucking up both the taste and the texture. Oh, and they cancelled tooty-fruities. Arseholes.
Put them in chains with the Mars corporation for cancelling Bounty Dark.
They've killed dark chocolate Bountys? Bastards.
That's up there with Morrisons cancelling Grape Nuts.
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
Yes words do have shared meanings, but words about an individual do not. That's when we get into basic manners. If I want to be called Bart and you keep calling me Joseph, then to me that's just rude. If I call you kirk and you say I'd rather be called algar, and I continue to call you kirk, then that's just me being rude.
If somebody wants to be called "them" which is a third party singular word anyway, then what's the bloody harm in calling them by what they want to be called?
Why, when you are speaking to someone, would you address them using pronouns? Seems bloody rude to me
Same.
As a child, if I said to my sister, about my mother "she wants us to put our coats on", my mother would immediately chime in "Who's 'she'? The cat's mother?"
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
I have no qualms with local government existing, but it shouldn't exist to serve curtain twitchers or other weirdos who want to tell others how to live their lives.
It should be cut down to size to deal with genuinely local issues, not individual ones.
I used to work a lot with local government, twenty years ago.
Even in those comparatively well-funded days, the main focus of local councils was how on earth to afford the child protection and social care responsibilities which central government mandated they provide but would not enable them the means the do so.
Local economic development, and public realm maintenance, were decidedly minority sports.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
I have no qualms with local government existing, but it shouldn't exist to serve curtain twitchers or other weirdos who want to tell others how to live their lives.
It should be cut down to size to deal with genuinely local issues, not individual ones.
The public realm is not an “individual issue”, whatever that’s supposed to mean.
I used to work a lot with local government, twenty years ago.
Even in those comparatively well-funded days, the main focus of local councils was how on earth to afford the child protection and social care responsibilities which central government mandated they provide but would not enable them the means the do so.
Local economic development, and public realm maintenance, were decidedly minority sports.
Again a part of it needing cutting down to size.
If central government is mandating something then central government should provide the funding for what it is mandating.
Local governance should be about local concerns, not either individual concerns or central government passing off its responsibilities that its mandating but not bothering to fund.
...The other day I met a new colleague who was introduced by his first name and he corrected and said he doesn't go by that name, he goes by his middle name. So from then on everyone has called him by his middle name - not unusual, I know many people who do that...
(Leonard) James Callaghan (James) Gordon Brown (Mary) Elizabeth Truss (Alexander) Boris Johnson
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Local government simply doesnt have the freedom to act, nor the ability to raise funds, nor the constitutional protection that is normal on most of the continent.
Just look at this latest Tory manouvre over 20 mph speed limits - in most of Europe the idea that central government could or should mandate what councils can or can’t do on an obviously local issue like this would provoke outrage.
Ditto the US.
Britain (and Ireland, and to some extent also NZ) are total outliers on this front.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Local government simply doesnt have the freedom to act, nor the ability to raise funds, nor the constitutional protection that is normal on most of the continent.
Just look at this latest Tory manouvre over 20 mph speed limits - in most of Europe the idea that central government could or should mandate what councils can or can’t do on an obviously local issue like this would provoke outrage.
If its an 'obviously local' issue then why is Drakeford doing anything? He runs a national Parliament, not a local council supposedly.
If its appropriate for Drakeford to act, then surely by extension it must be appropriate for Sunak to since Sunak is the English equivalent of Drakeford since we don't have an English First Minister.
I recently got planning permission (permis de construire) from the local Mairie in our French village. We submitted the plans and the Mayor decided whether to give the go ahead. He was unhappy about one of the colours we wanted to use (“a bit too Northern European”) so we changed it.
The Mairie along with the councillors, volunteers from the village including our neighbour, also decide whether to spend money on new street lighting, repairing the mediaeval stone bridge, fast broadband, funding a cinema festival etc. There are debates, they don’t always get consensus, but they decide. Not the local town council or the department, let alone the national government.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
Who do you think should take responsibility to fix the planning regime? Local or national politicians?
In Japan they fixed it by statute by setting national planning regulations and stripping local politicians of any say at all on what development occurs. They get a say in zoning, they can choose what's zoned for construction, but once its zoned that's the end of their involvement.
That's what we should do in this country. Get all the petty jumped up little local politicians and curtain twitching neighbours to mind their own effing business.
I recently got planning permission (permis de construire) from the local Mairie in our French village. We submitted the plans and the Mayor decided whether to give the go ahead. He was unhappy about one of the colours we wanted to use (“a bit too Northern European”) so we changed it.
The Mairie along with the councillors, volunteers from the village including our neighbour, also decide whether to spend money on new street lighting, repairing the mediaeval stone bridge, fast broadband, funding a cinema festival etc. There are debates, they don’t always get consensus, but they decide. Not the local town council or the department, let alone the national government.
The village (“commune”) is 250 people.
There are obviously challenges with the French system (many will bridle at the mayor choosing your colours) but it strikes me as a billion times more civilised than the situation in the UK where citizens effectively have no power, and what local government there is doesn’t give a fuck about medieval bridges and cinema festivals.
Britain is just not set up for this, it a structural and perhaps cultural issue, not even a funding issue.
I recently got planning permission (permis de construire) from the local Mairie in our French village. We submitted the plans and the Mayor decided whether to give the go ahead. He was unhappy about one of the colours we wanted to use (“a bit too Northern European”) so we changed it.
The Mairie along with the councillors, volunteers from the village including our neighbour, also decide whether to spend money on new street lighting, repairing the mediaeval stone bridge, fast broadband, funding a cinema festival etc. There are debates, they don’t always get consensus, but they decide. Not the local town council or the department, let alone the national government.
The village (“commune”) is 250 people.
There are obviously challenges with the French system (many will bridle at the mayor choosing your colours) but it strikes me as a billion times more civilised than the situation in the UK where citizens effectively have no power, and what local government there is doesn’t give a fuck about medieval bridges and cinema festivals.
Britain is just not set up for this, it a structural and perhaps cultural issue, not even a funding issue.
The result is shabby and ugly public spaces.
That's because Britain's local politicians spend all their time discussing things that should be none of their business.
Local government should be deciding how local public amenities are maintained, not what gets built on someone's private property.
If the politicians were stripped of the ability to interfere in the latter, then they could pay more attention to the former instead. And petty individuals who only go into politics to tell others how to live their lives might decide not to if politics instead is about maintaining and developing local amenities, not telling number 72 whether they can or can not get a permit for a development.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
Who do you think should take responsibility to fix the planning regime? Local or national politicians?
In Japan they fixed it by statute by setting national planning regulations and stripping local politicians of any say at all on what development occurs. They get a say in zoning, they can choose what's zoned for construction, but once its zoned that's the end of their involvement.
That's what we should do in this country. Get all the petty jumped up little local politicians and curtain twitching neighbours to mind their own effing business.
The British planning system operates dysfunctionally as a matter of national policy, even if the effects are local.
‼️ 👀 Intriguing: why was @Nigel_Farage invited to a grand gathering of Tory rebels tonight and why did @pritipatel keep paying tribute to him in her speech at the dinner? #CPC2023
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
Who do you think should take responsibility to fix the planning regime? Local or national politicians?
In Japan they fixed it by statute by setting national planning regulations and stripping local politicians of any say at all on what development occurs. They get a say in zoning, they can choose what's zoned for construction, but once its zoned that's the end of their involvement.
That's what we should do in this country. Get all the petty jumped up little local politicians and curtain twitching neighbours to mind their own effing business.
The British planning system operates dysfunctionally as a matter of national policy, even if the effects are local.
Agreed. It needs to be fixed as a matter of national policy too.
Then once removed from local interference, local politicians can start to do things they should actually take responsibility for, not spend time campaigning to increase homelessness so that property prices go higher.
...The other day I met a new colleague who was introduced by his first name and he corrected and said he doesn't go by that name, he goes by his middle name. So from then on everyone has called him by his middle name - not unusual, I know many people who do that...
(Leonard) James Callaghan (James) Gordon Brown (Mary) Elizabeth Truss (Alexander) Boris Johnson
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
This is *extremely* stupid and was completely predictable. Sunak is trying to give the image he’s governing like Captain Spreadsheet, but he’s just slow-motion Liz Truss.
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
‼️ 👀 Intriguing: why was @Nigel_Farage invited to a grand gathering of Tory rebels tonight and why did @pritipatel keep paying tribute to him in her speech at the dinner? #CPC2023
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
Been to almost every major party conference since 1997. Seen some that a quiet. Seen some that are raucous. Experienced parties drunk on power. Wallowing in hubris. Embracing oblivion and despair. But never seen anything like the Tories in Manchester 2023. A ghost town…
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
It's just becoming embarrassing now. This blunderbuss of insignificantly meaningless, and never to be implemented policies, rolled up with the rolled-up sleeved earnestness whilst flailing to say anything beyond 'i dont comment on my own speculation' makes late Major look like a titan.
I used to work a lot with local government, twenty years ago.
Even in those comparatively well-funded days, the main focus of local councils was how on earth to afford the child protection and social care responsibilities which central government mandated they provide but would not enable them the means the do so.
Local economic development, and public realm maintenance, were decidedly minority sports.
Again a part of it needing cutting down to size.
If central government is mandating something then central government should provide the funding for what it is mandating.
Local governance should be about local concerns, not either individual concerns or central government passing off its responsibilities that its mandating but not bothering to fund.
"This is a LOCAL government for LOCAL people! There's nothing for YOU here!"
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
Yes words do have shared meanings, but words about an individual do not. That's when we get into basic manners. If I want to be called Bart and you keep calling me Joseph, then to me that's just rude. If I call you kirk and you say I'd rather be called algar, and I continue to call you kirk, then that's just me being rude.
If somebody wants to be called "them" which is a third party singular word anyway, then what's the bloody harm in calling them by what they want to be called?
Why, when you are speaking to someone, would you address them using pronouns? Seems bloody rude to me
Same.
As a child, if I said to my sister, about my mother "she wants us to put our coats on", my mother would immediately chime in "Who's 'she'? The cat's mother?"
Nearly 60 years since a rock'n'roll combo insisted on being called Them. It's all Van Morrison's fault.
Been to almost every major party conference since 1997. Seen some that a quiet. Seen some that are raucous. Experienced parties drunk on power. Wallowing in hubris. Embracing oblivion and despair. But never seen anything like the Tories in Manchester 2023. A ghost town…
Is that cos the trains aren't running and the party that will 'kill to support our brave motorists' can't be arsed to drive to Manchester?
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
Isn't that what local councils, elections and whatnot are for?
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
Isn't that what local councils, elections and whatnot are for?
I presume the "Town Board" will be a Sunak-appointed party committee drawn from an approved pool of motorists.
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
How about doing the f’ing job they’re paid to f’ing do?
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
Isn't that what local councils, elections and whatnot are for?
I presume the "Town Board" will be a Sunak-appointed party committee drawn from an approved pool of motorists.
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
Who do you think should take responsibility to fix the planning regime? Local or national politicians?
In Japan they fixed it by statute by setting national planning regulations and stripping local politicians of any say at all on what development occurs. They get a say in zoning, they can choose what's zoned for construction, but once its zoned that's the end of their involvement.
That's what we should do in this country. Get all the petty jumped up little local politicians and curtain twitching neighbours to mind their own effing business.
This. I'd add that even in Japan, where they do still have planning-related stuff under the control of local officials, they still manage to fuck it up.
One example is that there's some post-war ordinance that's supposed to promote food security or something whereby if land is designated agricultural, you need the permission of the local agricultural committee to buy it unless you're a registered farmer. The only way you become a registered farmer is by... farming some land. Then they wonder why the rural areas are depopulating and fields are getting abandoned because there's nobody to farm it.
Been to almost every major party conference since 1997. Seen some that a quiet. Seen some that are raucous. Experienced parties drunk on power. Wallowing in hubris. Embracing oblivion and despair. But never seen anything like the Tories in Manchester 2023. A ghost town…
It's very quiet, and there are fewer stands than last year, but people are generally fairly cheerful. It doesn't feel especially fractious- just a bit resigned.
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
Apparently Elon Musk is triggered by people putting pronouns into their twitter bios, so he's having them edited out, the great big pathetic snowflake.
What on earth is her problem?
So deliberate misgendering is cool if it’s someone you don’t like. Right…..
No. His pronouns are he/twat.
I cannot see why he is so worked up about people using their pronouns. I cannot see why anyone would get worked up about it.
This is really very simple.
It doesn't matter what you believe about gender and trans. You can believe you need to have a penis to be a man. Or you can believe that people have the right to self identify.
This is about simple respect for people's choices. If someone calls themselves - oh, I don't know - Tau Techno Mechanicus, then I will say "Hi Tau Techno Mechanicus".
If someone says, "I wish to be referred to as 'they'/'them'", then I shall say "Of course".
Because that is simple human courtesy. If it doesn't put me out, and they want to be referred to as "they" or "X Æ A-12", then I shall obviously do it.
It's like, if someone believed in God, and I didn't, I obviously wouldn't refer to them as believing in a "giant sky fairy". Simply just because someone has different beliefs, doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them - and their beliefs - with a modicum of respect*.
Basic fucking human courtesy and respect for others.
* There are exceptions, obviously.
No. It's slightly trickier than that. Words are public not private possessions. You can in your private thoughts and speech to self use words how you like, but that world only belongs to you. But in public speech words have shared meanings, so it is not obvious that it is proper to compel someone else to use words in a way obliging them to renounce the ways in which our shared language works and is rendered meaningful. Courtesy and respect is a two way street.
Sure: and believers that gender is solely determined by genitals, and those who believe in unfettered self-ID will have different meanings of the words "boy", "girl", "man" and "woman".
And you know what, that's OK. People have different words for things all the time.
But when you are speaking to someone, or of someone, it is polite to refer to them as they wish to be referred.
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
And others are uncomprehending.
...Senior Conservative Cabinet Minister overheard on his phone,
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
Been to almost every major party conference since 1997. Seen some that a quiet. Seen some that are raucous. Experienced parties drunk on power. Wallowing in hubris. Embracing oblivion and despair. But never seen anything like the Tories in Manchester 2023. A ghost town…
Is that cos the trains aren't running and the party that will 'kill to support our brave motorists' can't be arsed to drive to Manchester?
In part and the fact most party members didn't vote for Rishi to be leader anyway but how it comes across on TV is more important, on the news clips Rishi's Q and A came across quite well. He looked dynamic and had some razmataz which Starmer doesn't
A brief contribution to the travelogue. I've just spent a couple of weeks in France and Spain. What stood out most was how superior the public realm was to ours, in both countries. The streets were cleaner, public flower beds beautifully manicured, public toilets plentiful and fine, and so on. There is a civic pride that we have utterly lost, presumably largely due to local authority budgets being axed, but also due to a lack of political will to spend money on such matters. On transport, the trains were great but the buses as bad, if not worse, than ours. And, if I could murder easyjet, I would.
Public squalor is a peculiarly English thing. On the whole Scotland is different and more continental.
I am not a seasoned European traveller, but recently we visited Pompeii. We stayed in a tiny B&B near the ruins, and most mornings I would go out for an early-morning stroll before it got too hot.
The centre of Pompeii town (the modern one...) was very nice, and just what you imagine an Italian town to be like. But as I walked out of it, particularly to the north, the buildings and surroundings were really shabbby. In particular the render/plaster was invariably really, really grimy, or even patchy. There was a fair bit of litter, and lots of graffiti.
(I also liked the way rubbish bags would hang down from balconies; a small van was going around collecting them.)
One of the poorest parts of Italy.
All my life, British public spaces have looked cheap, run-down, and littered with clumsy signage and utilities.
Not always, but often.
I’ve wondered why this is for a long time, and I ended up concluding that these things are usually the domain of local government, which is notably feeble and underfunded by Western standards.
Our local government has far too much power, standing in the way of people developing their own land.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
the problem there is the planning regime, not the fact that local government exists.
Who do you think should take responsibility to fix the planning regime? Local or national politicians?
In Japan they fixed it by statute by setting national planning regulations and stripping local politicians of any say at all on what development occurs. They get a say in zoning, they can choose what's zoned for construction, but once its zoned that's the end of their involvement.
That's what we should do in this country. Get all the petty jumped up little local politicians and curtain twitching neighbours to mind their own effing business.
This. I'd add that even in Japan, where they do still have planning-related stuff under the control of local officials, they still manage to fuck it up.
One example is that there's some post-war ordinance that's supposed to promote food security or something whereby if land is designated agricultural, you need the permission of the local agricultural committee to buy it unless you're a registered farmer. The only way you become a registered farmer is by... farming some land. Then they wonder why the rural areas are depopulating and fields are getting abandoned because there's nobody to farm it.
Presumably you need to marry an existing farmer... you know, there's a business opportunity there.
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
And others are uncomprehending.
...Senior Conservative Cabinet Minister overheard on his phone,
John McTernan @johnmcternan · 12h "I believe the country wants change", Rishi Sunak tells @bbclaurak - giving @UKLabour's brilliant digital team a great clip!
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
And others are uncomprehending.
...Senior Conservative Cabinet Minister overheard on his phone,
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
"Little Napoleon".
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
Who are this weird breed of people Sunak calls ‘the motorists’? Does he mean anyone who drives sometimes, i.e cyclists, pedestrians and aviators?
To be a motorist, you require string backed driving gloves, a pine rear view mirror air freshener, and a tin of travel sweets in the glove compartment.
Just sometimes driving a car simply isn't sufficient.
As a child, the car ashtray was always full of blackcurrant pastilles.
Sadly, since, Rowntree have withdrawn the blackcurrant-only rolls, and then made the recipe vegan, fucking up both the taste and the texture. Oh, and they cancelled tooty-fruities. Arseholes.
Put them in chains with the Mars corporation for cancelling Bounty Dark.
They've killed dark chocolate Bountys? Bastards.
That's up there with Morrisons cancelling Grape Nuts.
They claim it's a "manufacturing pause", but yes.
WTF.
Now I'm really ANGRY. Dark chocolate Bountys were the only Bountys worth eating.
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
Most local councils have drawn up Local Plans setting up where new housing should go in their area with the required infrastructure for the next decade or 2. Even if a Nimby opposition group takes over at a later election they soon find they also need a Local Plan
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
"Little Napoleon".
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
You're just a batshit crazy illiterate fanatic.
I'm pro public transport and cycling.
We should build more roads to support both, and driving.
Unlike you, I'm pro choice.
Unlike you, I don't object to others choices.
Unlike you, I'm not anti-growth or anti-investment.
@steverichards14 Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
MP in the Times is quoted as saying he spending the week playing golf.
The smart ones are interviewing for their next gig
And others are uncomprehending.
...Senior Conservative Cabinet Minister overheard on his phone,
Been to almost every major party conference since 1997. Seen some that a quiet. Seen some that are raucous. Experienced parties drunk on power. Wallowing in hubris. Embracing oblivion and despair. But never seen anything like the Tories in Manchester 2023. A ghost town…
It's very quiet, and there are fewer stands than last year, but people are generally fairly cheerful. It doesn't feel especially fractious- just a bit resigned.
It seems in the Westminster village everyone has written off the government, just at the moment they appear to be making a bit of headway by swinging the public discourse on to their favoured topics. They’re doing better in the polls - albeit marginally - than at any time since the early spring.
I’m not sure any of the negative coverage in the last week has cut through, to coin a phrase, whereas some of the (misplaced) positive coverage of Rishi’s brave abolition of climate change has made its way into voter intention with a decline in Labour support, and weirdly without giving a boost to the Greens.
Labour really needs a good conference - I expect it’ll be very professionally presented - and to win at least Tamworth and ideally Rutherglen. Mid Beds is less important PR-wise because they can blame the Lib Dems if it doesn’t happen.
British troops openly in Ukraine training Ukrainian troops is a fucking mad idea
Isn’t that how the American involvement in Vietnam began? Americans went in to “train” the south Vietnamese?
That didn’t work out well, and in that war America was not directly fighting a nuclear armed major power with psycho tendencies
The wally also wants UK defence firms to locate production there. Why on earth do they keep putting him in charge of things? His wig would probably make a better Defence Sec.
Since when were exports a bad thing?
Britain has sought to have production overseas for the past 316 years and counting.
Why do you object now?
I have never made any posts welcoming any British firm moving production overseas. At least locating it in Britain creates some ancillary benefit to the economy from our continuing weapons donations. To say nothing of the fact that it's a warzone.
They aren't moving production. They're setting up new production overseas. That is standard practice in the defence industry, not some Shapps innovation, as you seem to imagine.
Yes, I know, and I think the Defence Secretary should be encouraging them to set up new production in the UK.
The Ukrainians want production of arms they are procuring to occur in factories they control.
The recent history of people telling them want they can have and when explains why.
They aren't procuring anything. The arms are being donated. It doesn't seem uncommon or unreasonable for the donor to decide what to give, or when.
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
Most local councils have drawn up Local Plans setting up where new housing should go in their area with the required infrastructure for the next decade or 2. Even if a Nimby opposition group takes over at a later election they soon find they also need a Local Plan
And once the land is zoned as appropriate for development with a Local Plan can anyone simply buy a plot of land and send in builders the next day to start development without putting in plans or a request first?
Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
And if someone wants to bulldoze land they own and redevelop it in a way they think is more suitable can they simply send in the bulldozers without begging permission first? Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
Most local councils have drawn up Local Plans setting up where new housing should go in their area with the required infrastructure for the next decade or 2. Even if a Nimby opposition group takes over at a later election they soon find they also need a Local Plan
And once the land is zoned as appropriate for development with a Local Plan can anyone simply buy a plot of land and send in builders the next day to start development without putting in plans or a request first?
Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
And if someone wants to bulldoze land they own and redevelop it in a way they think is more suitable can they simply send in the bulldozers without begging permission first? Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
There is a presumption in favour of development in sites allocated for housing in Local Plans
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
"Little Napoleon".
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
You're just a batshit crazy illiterate fanatic.
I'm pro public transport and cycling.
We should build more roads to support both, and driving.
Unlike you, I'm pro choice.
Unlike you, I don't object to others choices.
Unlike you, I'm not anti-growth or anti-investment.
You, 5 minutes ago: Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour
Putting a decent bus service in to reduce private car use is not dictatorial.
On the other hand, Napoleon did reduce the power of local government. Which makes you...
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
Most local councils have drawn up Local Plans setting up where new housing should go in their area with the required infrastructure for the next decade or 2. Even if a Nimby opposition group takes over at a later election they soon find they also need a Local Plan
And once the land is zoned as appropriate for development with a Local Plan can anyone simply buy a plot of land and send in builders the next day to start development without putting in plans or a request first?
Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
And if someone wants to bulldoze land they own and redevelop it in a way they think is more suitable can they simply send in the bulldozers without begging permission first? Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
There is a presumption in favour of development in sites allocated for housing in Local Plans
Not remotely good enough.
There shouldn't be a presumption of anything. If its allocated for housing it should be automatic, without even discussing with the Council or the neighbours. Simply if you own the land, and you follow the law, then it can be built without preconditions or interference. As in Japan.
This is the best column I have read in ages. Essential reading. Some astonishing stats.
Robert Colvile @rcolvile · 9h In my column today, I make the case that British politics is now defined by age. And the data underlying that claim is absolutely staggering. Quick thread (1/?)
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
"Little Napoleon".
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
You're just a batshit crazy illiterate fanatic.
I'm pro public transport and cycling.
We should build more roads to support both, and driving.
Unlike you, I'm pro choice.
Unlike you, I don't object to others choices.
Unlike you, I'm not anti-growth or anti-investment.
You, 5 minutes ago: Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour
Putting a decent bus service in to reduce private car use is not dictatorial.
On the other hand, Napoleon did reduce the power of local government. Which makes you...
You really are illiterate. Do you even know what the word "dictate" means? 🤦♂️
Putting on a decent bus service is not dictating anything. Its offering a choice, I'm pro-choice.
I rode a bus a few days ago as I said, indeed I was the only passenger on it. I'm glad that service was available and fully support it being available.
Offering choice is a positive. Trying to force one choice to be taken over another is not.
British troops openly in Ukraine training Ukrainian troops is a fucking mad idea
Isn’t that how the American involvement in Vietnam began? Americans went in to “train” the south Vietnamese?
That didn’t work out well, and in that war America was not directly fighting a nuclear armed major power with psycho tendencies
The wally also wants UK defence firms to locate production there. Why on earth do they keep putting him in charge of things? His wig would probably make a better Defence Sec.
Since when were exports a bad thing?
Britain has sought to have production overseas for the past 316 years and counting.
Why do you object now?
I have never made any posts welcoming any British firm moving production overseas. At least locating it in Britain creates some ancillary benefit to the economy from our continuing weapons donations. To say nothing of the fact that it's a warzone.
They aren't moving production. They're setting up new production overseas. That is standard practice in the defence industry, not some Shapps innovation, as you seem to imagine.
Yes, I know, and I think the Defence Secretary should be encouraging them to set up new production in the UK.
The Ukrainians want production of arms they are procuring to occur in factories they control.
The recent history of people telling them want they can have and when explains why.
They aren't procuring anything. The arms are being donated. It doesn't seem uncommon or unreasonable for the donor to decide what to give, or when.
They’re buying a lot of weaponry (for example all the bayraktar drones from Turkey, a lot of their military vehicles, ammunition, guns etc) and being donated some too. It’s a mixture. Ukraine has spent billions on armaments since being invaded.
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
Most local councils have drawn up Local Plans setting up where new housing should go in their area with the required infrastructure for the next decade or 2. Even if a Nimby opposition group takes over at a later election they soon find they also need a Local Plan
And once the land is zoned as appropriate for development with a Local Plan can anyone simply buy a plot of land and send in builders the next day to start development without putting in plans or a request first?
Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
And if someone wants to bulldoze land they own and redevelop it in a way they think is more suitable can they simply send in the bulldozers without begging permission first? Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
There is a presumption in favour of development in sites allocated for housing in Local Plans
Not remotely good enough.
There shouldn't be a presumption of anything. If its allocated for housing it should be automatic, without even discussing with the Council or the neighbours. Simply if you own the land, and you follow the law, then it can be built without preconditions or interference. As in Japan.
There are City Planning Areas given for development in Japan but outside those there are significant restrictions on development
Mobile phones to be banned in schools , many already do that and the workshy using rather Dickensian language by the DE are going to be the latest entry into who can the Tories use as the next piñata!
I can’t wait till it’s Cruellas day , just what joyful things does she have in store .
Starting at Churchill and Attlee and ending in Truss is quite a contrast and she gets a mention and they don't
I haven't read it yet. Due to a lack of space I don't buy hardbacks any more: I get a copy from my local library and later buy the paperback when it comes out. Richards is good but he's increasingly out of date (he's 63), and it's beginning to show, not just in some of his jokes but some of his conclusions. In a previous book he pointed out that PMs usually have more time than they think, which is statistically correct but in this new world of instant reactions possibly no longer useful, as the tenures of May (3 years, 11 days), Boris (3 years, 44 days), Brown (2 years, 318 days), and Truss (49 days) shows. Nevertheless I still like reading him, so there's that.
British troops openly in Ukraine training Ukrainian troops is a fucking mad idea
Isn’t that how the American involvement in Vietnam began? Americans went in to “train” the south Vietnamese?
That didn’t work out well, and in that war America was not directly fighting a nuclear armed major power with psycho tendencies
The wally also wants UK defence firms to locate production there. Why on earth do they keep putting him in charge of things? His wig would probably make a better Defence Sec.
Since when were exports a bad thing?
Britain has sought to have production overseas for the past 316 years and counting.
Why do you object now?
I have never made any posts welcoming any British firm moving production overseas. At least locating it in Britain creates some ancillary benefit to the economy from our continuing weapons donations. To say nothing of the fact that it's a warzone.
They aren't moving production. They're setting up new production overseas. That is standard practice in the defence industry, not some Shapps innovation, as you seem to imagine.
Yes, I know, and I think the Defence Secretary should be encouraging them to set up new production in the UK.
The Ukrainians want production of arms they are procuring to occur in factories they control.
The recent history of people telling them want they can have and when explains why.
They aren't procuring anything. The arms are being donated. It doesn't seem uncommon or unreasonable for the donor to decide what to give, or when.
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
"Little Napoleon".
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
You're just a batshit crazy illiterate fanatic.
I'm pro public transport and cycling.
We should build more roads to support both, and driving.
Unlike you, I'm pro choice.
Unlike you, I don't object to others choices.
Unlike you, I'm not anti-growth or anti-investment.
You, 5 minutes ago: Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour
Putting a decent bus service in to reduce private car use is not dictatorial.
On the other hand, Napoleon did reduce the power of local government. Which makes you...
You really are illiterate. Do you even know what the word "dictate" means? 🤦♂️
Putting on a decent bus service is not dictating anything. Its offering a choice, I'm pro-choice.
I rode a bus a few days ago as I said, indeed I was the only passenger on it. I'm glad that service was available and fully support it being available.
Offering choice is a positive. Trying to force one choice to be taken over another is not.
So why did you claim is was "Little Napoleon" behaviour?
This is the best column I have read in ages. Essential reading. Some astonishing stats.
Robert Colvile @rcolvile · 9h In my column today, I make the case that British politics is now defined by age. And the data underlying that claim is absolutely staggering. Quick thread (1/?)
I wish journalists would realise that twitter/x is now useless. I can only view their 1/7 tweet ('X') - can't see the other 6/7, can't see any replies, can't even click through to their profile. They might as well be posting to linkedin.
Why are you so obsessive that you think those are remotely contradictory?
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
reduce the problems that high car dependency and congestion can cause by making walking, cycling, and public transport more attractive
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
No, my mistrust of local governance comes from local governments blocking housing developments. Thought I was pretty clear on that.
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
"Little Napoleon".
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
You're just a batshit crazy illiterate fanatic.
I'm pro public transport and cycling.
We should build more roads to support both, and driving.
Unlike you, I'm pro choice.
Unlike you, I don't object to others choices.
Unlike you, I'm not anti-growth or anti-investment.
You, 5 minutes ago: Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour
Putting a decent bus service in to reduce private car use is not dictatorial.
On the other hand, Napoleon did reduce the power of local government. Which makes you...
You really are illiterate. Do you even know what the word "dictate" means? 🤦♂️
Putting on a decent bus service is not dictating anything. Its offering a choice, I'm pro-choice.
I rode a bus a few days ago as I said, indeed I was the only passenger on it. I'm glad that service was available and fully support it being available.
Offering choice is a positive. Trying to force one choice to be taken over another is not.
So why did you claim is was "Little Napoleon" behaviour?
I didn't claim offering choice was that. Try reading what I actually wrote.
Comments
The other day I met a new colleague who was introduced by his first name and he corrected and said he doesn't go by that name, he goes by his middle name. So from then on everyone has called him by his middle name - not unusual, I know many people who do that.
Should we not do that in your eyes, should we insist on calling him by his proper first name?
(I sometimes wonder if visitors to Salisbury in the latter part of the 13th century moaned about the new Gothic monstrosity erected to replace the lovely old Romanesque cathedral up on the hill.)
Personally I'd go for more extensive planting on one or more sides, to give a different special landscape and approach, but with the gap with a new single tree visible above the forest on the slopes.
I'd probably also do some art-in-the-landscape, which can work very well.
By the same token, when they are not present what business is it of theirs to police or compel your language?
I am currently doing a lot of work relating to Asia. The names used are often very unfamiliar to me. So I use either the name or "They" - to avoid making assumptions - in discussion or correspondence, which works perfectly fine.
That's up there with Morrisons cancelling Grape Nuts.
It needs cutting down in size, not empowering more.
I mean, he's not paying or anything, but he wants it.
Just look at this latest Tory manouvre over 20 mph speed limits - in most of Europe the idea that central government could or should mandate what councils can or can’t do on an obviously local issue like this would provoke outrage.
It's already a Labour attack ad...
https://x.com/UKLabour/status/1708550104955666926?s=20
As a child, if I said to my sister, about my mother "she wants us to put our coats on", my mother would immediately chime in "Who's 'she'? The cat's mother?"
It should be cut down to size to deal with genuinely local issues, not individual ones.
Even in those comparatively well-funded days, the main focus of local councils was how on earth to afford the child protection and social care responsibilities which central government mandated they provide but would not enable them the means the do so.
Local economic development, and public realm maintenance, were decidedly minority sports.
If central government is mandating something then central government should provide the funding for what it is mandating.
Local governance should be about local concerns, not either individual concerns or central government passing off its responsibilities that its mandating but not bothering to fund.
(James) Gordon Brown
(Mary) Elizabeth Truss
(Alexander) Boris Johnson
Britain (and Ireland, and to some extent also NZ) are total outliers on this front.
If its appropriate for Drakeford to act, then surely by extension it must be appropriate for Sunak to since Sunak is the English equivalent of Drakeford since we don't have an English First Minister.
The Mairie along with the councillors, volunteers from the village including our neighbour, also decide whether to spend money on new street lighting, repairing the mediaeval stone bridge, fast broadband, funding a cinema festival etc. There are debates, they don’t always get consensus, but they decide. Not the local town council or the department, let alone the national government.
The village (“commune”) is 250 people.
Rishi Sunak has a mutiny of donors on his hands.
Shots fired by Lord Cruddas who is hosting big black tie dinner in Manchester
“Im asking all Conservative Party donors big and small to stop funding the Conservative Party until we can implement constitutional changes”
In Japan they fixed it by statute by setting national planning regulations and stripping local politicians of any say at all on what development occurs. They get a say in zoning, they can choose what's zoned for construction, but once its zoned that's the end of their involvement.
That's what we should do in this country. Get all the petty jumped up little local politicians and curtain twitching neighbours to mind their own effing business.
* "Casualties, Battlefield Medicine, & Lessons from Ukraine - Threats, Logistics & Innovations", Perun, YouTube, 2023/10/01, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr961RGNBxU
Britain is just not set up for this, it a structural and perhaps cultural issue, not even a funding issue.
The result is shabby and ugly public spaces.
Local government should be deciding how local public amenities are maintained, not what gets built on someone's private property.
If the politicians were stripped of the ability to interfere in the latter, then they could pay more attention to the former instead. And petty individuals who only go into politics to tell others how to live their lives might decide not to if politics instead is about maintaining and developing local amenities, not telling number 72 whether they can or can not get a permit for a development.
‼️ 👀 Intriguing: why was
@Nigel_Farage
invited to a grand gathering of Tory rebels tonight and why did
@pritipatel
keep paying tribute to him in her speech at the dinner? #CPC2023
Then once removed from local interference, local politicians can start to do things they should actually take responsibility for, not spend time campaigning to increase homelessness so that property prices go higher.
"...People should decide what happens... Each [of the fifty-five] town[s] will receive a new Town Board as part of PM @RishiSunak’s long-term plan for towns... Bringing together community groups, businesses and local authorities to make sure the decisions are the right ones for local people...", UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet, Twitter, 2023/10/01 12:44UTC, see here and here
This is *extremely* stupid and was completely predictable. Sunak is trying to give the image he’s governing like Captain Spreadsheet, but he’s just slow-motion Liz Truss.
https://x.com/jamesrbuk/status/1708582654029795515?s=20
@OilSheppard
Sunak’s backpedaling on climate has collapsed the UK carbon price, just as the EU soft launches its carbon border tax
As a result UK exporters (including wind farms!) will eventually transfer £££££ to the EU that once would have flowed to the exchequer 🇬🇧
https://x.com/OilSheppard/status/1708392374651560089?s=20
Ah, Useless himself...
@ChrisMusson
EXCL: Secret plan to close every police station in crucial Rutherglen & Hamilton West by-election seat
Labour blames SNP ministers’ budget calls for the Police Scotland proposal, revealed days ahead of Thursday’s vote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nhcWUTHNyI
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1708455575581782108?t=_7wfjw8Wgu-S1bmfth9_aA&s=19
Though still youthful I can recall vividly the Tories’ pre-election conference in 1996…it felt tired and self aware that power was moving away from them…but nothing like the gathering in Manchester..R Sunak is not in control..and doesn’t understand how to do politics at this level..Tories stay away because there’s no point in being at their conference..a weird 13 years has come to this..
Been to almost every major party conference since 1997. Seen some that a quiet. Seen some that are raucous. Experienced parties drunk on power. Wallowing in hubris. Embracing oblivion and despair. But never seen anything like the Tories in Manchester 2023. A ghost town…
I got a bus the other day. My car was in the garage for repairs, so I got a bus from my home to the garage to pick up my car.
Does the fact I took a bus to get to the garage to pick my car up once it was repaired make me any less of a driver? Of course I want a bus within a convenient walk from my house, doesn't mean I am any less of a driver.
Is this where your mistrust of local government comes from?
https://www.warrington.gov.uk/LTP4
Of course trying to dictate how people get about is every bit as petty Little Napoleon behaviour as trying to dictate how people develop their own land.
I'm quite glad that I could walk the other day to a bus stop and get on board a bus when one went past within a few minutes. I'm not really bothered that I was the only person (other than the driver) on board the bus when I got on board.
By the time we reached the garage in the town centre a second person had got on board you might be happy to know.
Choice should be available for those who have problems with their own transport or who are too young or otherwise unable to drive. If people choose not to take that choice, it is entirely their free choice and I am pro-choice.
Even if a bus carrying one passenger takes more road space than a car would have, no reason we shouldn't have buses.
Literally no casework in their constituency?
Sunak couldn't be having that.
One example is that there's some post-war ordinance that's supposed to promote food security or something whereby if land is designated agricultural, you need the permission of the local agricultural committee to buy it unless you're a registered farmer. The only way you become a registered farmer is by... farming some land. Then they wonder why the rural areas are depopulating and fields are getting abandoned because there's nobody to farm it.
WTF.
And you know what, that's OK. People have different words for things all the time.
But when you are speaking to someone, or of someone, it is polite to refer to them as they wish to be referred.
What about a moped?
What about an electric motorcycle?
What about an e-bike?
...Senior Conservative Cabinet Minister overheard on his phone,
"It's bloody awful, I have never seen this before, only about a fifth of those who bought tickets have turned up. If it's like this tomorrow I'm coming home"..
https://twitter.com/archer_rs/status/1708531993552556321
John McTernan
@johnmcternan
·
12h
"I believe the country wants change", Rishi Sunak tells @bbclaurak
- giving @UKLabour's brilliant digital team a great clip!
Your local council is trying to improve transport provision in your community and you're throwing a big strop because it's not all about you and your car.
Your dislike of local government is based on this. Your hatred of NIMBYism is projection - ultimately, you don't want to see anything else on the road but you.
Now I'm really ANGRY. Dark chocolate Bountys were the only Bountys worth eating.
"Turning Points: Crisis and Change in Modern Britain, from 1945 to Truss", 2023, Steve Richards, Pan Macmillan, ISBN: 9781035015351, see https://www.waterstones.com/book/turning-points/steve-richards/9781035015351
I'm pro public transport and cycling.
We should build more roads to support both, and driving.
Unlike you, I'm pro choice.
Unlike you, I don't object to others choices.
Unlike you, I'm not anti-growth or anti-investment.
I’m not sure any of the negative coverage in the last week has cut through, to coin a phrase, whereas some of the (misplaced) positive coverage of Rishi’s brave abolition of climate change has made its way into voter intention with a decline in Labour support, and weirdly without giving a boost to the Greens.
Labour really needs a good conference - I expect it’ll be very professionally presented - and to win at least Tamworth and ideally Rutherglen. Mid Beds is less important PR-wise because they can blame the Lib Dems if it doesn’t happen.
Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
And if someone wants to bulldoze land they own and redevelop it in a way they think is more suitable can they simply send in the bulldozers without begging permission first? Or do they need to inform the curtain twitching neighbours and beg for permission first?
77% of us are drivers.
People are more than one thing.
Putting a decent bus service in to reduce private car use is not dictatorial.
On the other hand, Napoleon did reduce the power of local government. Which makes you...
There shouldn't be a presumption of anything. If its allocated for housing it should be automatic, without even discussing with the Council or the neighbours. Simply if you own the land, and you follow the law, then it can be built without preconditions or interference. As in Japan.
Robert Colvile
@rcolvile
·
9h
In my column today, I make the case that British politics is now defined by age. And the data underlying that claim is absolutely staggering. Quick thread (1/?)
https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1708454137354932478
Putting on a decent bus service is not dictating anything. Its offering a choice, I'm pro-choice.
I rode a bus a few days ago as I said, indeed I was the only passenger on it. I'm glad that service was available and fully support it being available.
Offering choice is a positive. Trying to force one choice to be taken over another is not.
I can’t wait till it’s Cruellas day , just what joyful things does she have in store .
“We need to change our economic geography – away from cities.”
Move over Chairman Mao!
@benrileysmith
🇺🇦Exclusive🇺🇦
Ben Wallace asked Rishi Sunak to spend an extra **£2.3 billion** in military support to Ukraine shortly before leaving as Defence Sec
Would = a 50% increase in UK commitments to date. Revelation piles pressure on PM to agree extra support