Re Southport: Why are people on here obsessing about race and Rwanda and missing the obvious?
A man targeted girls and women. Where he came from or his parents may be neither here nor there. His sex and the sex of his victims likely are.
Sadly since Cyclefree and others left, this site has more male racists than females at all, it seems.
So the male racists are leading the charge with what they know best, and forget women and girls. Unless the girls are a proxy to a racist jibe.
I didn't know Cyclefree had left, that is a real loss.
I don't know what is going on in Southport, whether the locals know something we don't or if they've been hopelessly misled by dodgy media sources. Or if it's a bunch of Tommy boy entryists. But there can be no excuse for rioting and disorder.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do right wingers here really think that rentamob Yaxley Lennons arriving in Southport to feast parasitically on its grief is a good look for them?
The same right wingers would be stating - rightly - that Gaza protestors shrieking about Jews or just stop oilers blocking ambulances are terrible optics for the left. But they seem to have a blind spot here.
These are your answer to just stop oil. They’re just as off putting.
Whatever you think of JSO, they don't go across the country to take advantage of mass murder, or set fire to police vans and punch officers. Describing their activities as violent rather than disruptive is a deliberate false equivalence, imo.
There is some dispute over the exact rise and patterns / trends differ e.g. in London it is supposedly down a bit. But one big one is the spread, it was really a London thing 10-15 years ago, now seeing big rises outside the capital in places that never really saw it before. I presume County Lines is a big part of that.
Also its any time of day or night, in really public places with loads of "civilians" about with absolutely massive weapons. Calling them knives is rather understating them.
Reeves botches up her tax plan Miliband fks up energy policy Cooper has riots on the streets And Starmer gets booed for a 2 minute visit. ( why did he even bother ? )
And they already have their paws all over the triumphalist shitcanning of Rwanda, the optics of which are horrid in this context.
Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.
The pair of you are completely deluded. I am no fan of Labour and fully expect it to go pearshaped at some stage, but really it hasn't yet and won't for awhile. We are still in the honeymoon period and will be for sometime. The fact you think it is all over now just shows how biased you both are.
I will admit I didn't think it would go tits up this quickly. But it is.
It hasn't. It inevitably will as it does for all governments sooner or later. It is only in your mind that it has.
The first sets of approval ratings from pollsters will be interesting. My expectation is that they’ll not have shifted much of at all since the election, because people are disengaged from politics now the election is over. This site is a very niche grouping of people actually still interested.
Then we’ll get several months where all political interest focuses on the US. Only after November would I expect any major polling of approval shifts.
A lot of PB Tories are still in the denial stage of grief.
Here we go again
You've had 14 years to rehearse this, and this is all you've got? And I thought the Paris Olympics committee were useless.
You could go with Keir is great which he obviously isn't (and don't get me started onReeves:s manifest inadequacy) so you are attacking on a team level. Fine. So you don't say Yay Keir you say Yay Labour. So then we take it that when you say Labour you mean, you know, Labour. So then I mention the year which was after 2002 and before 2004 and all hell breaks loose. Like waaaah I mean labour EXCEPT 2003 and those Iraqi children were not South African anyway and I just can't believe your bad taste in bringing that up again, what sort of monster are you?
Lie to the House of Commons about WMD, lie to the HoC about a few bottles of generic screwtop Chardonnay. Johnson is truly the last word in pure evil.
Interesting that the police seem to have become the go-to enemy for Far Right pissed up idiots.
I guess law and order has been dropped from the right's agenda for the time being?
As I said, it's because the police and authorities have previously covered up serious criminal behaviour by immigrants/asylum seekers/Muslims perpetrated against white English girls under the guise of "community relations" that's why this has cut very deep. There's a lot of latent anger about the Rotherham cover up across the country and the police instantly ruling out terrorism and being shady about the perpetrator's background for enough time has got people believing there's another cover up in progress and that the three murdered girls are now just added to the list of victims who won't get justice the same as the thousands of girls across northern cities who didn't get justice.
The Labour honeymoon is very swiftly coming to an end. A Tory PM would have handled the Southport situation better than Starmer has. He's got no righteous anger just mealy mouthed bullshit. He's got no way of stopping the idiots on the streets rioting either, he supports more immigration and more asylum seekers. He cancelled the deportation plan, he's closing the asylum ship and all he talks about is "processing more applications" or doing it faster which is just code for "accept more and do it faster" people aren't stupid.
If Labour doesn't do anything and the next Tory leader isn't careful I worry that Reform will take 5-10 points off Labour in 2029 and get 200 seats.
I haven't feared for the future of the country like this for a while, people in the streets targeting people who don't have white skin is the nightmare scenario and Labour spending the next 5 years letting in all and sundry at the border will only make it worse.
This stuff is now daily occurrence. Nice summers evening, can't even go to the amusement park without a hold of mask wearing yuffs having a knife fight.
It was happening every summer on Margate promenade in the good old days.
Do right wingers here really think that rentamob Yaxley Lennons arriving in Southport to feast parasitically on its grief is a good look for them?
The same right wingers would be stating - rightly - that Gaza protestors shrieking about Jews or just stop oilers blocking ambulances are terrible optics for the left. But they seem to have a blind spot here.
These are your answer to just stop oil. They’re just as off putting.
What the fuck are you wanking on about? Stick to shitty English wine opinions
There was a rather smart post on here earlier by someone about the way the UK is increasingly resembling sectarian Northern Ireland, with different groups that don't integrate.
Even if this tragedy turns out to have nothing to do with recent immigration, it's clear where the tensions are.
There’s three dead girls in large fridges at the moment who will never live the lives they had hoped for or their parents had hoped for and people in that community are scared and frightened and your posting shit like This.
Should they not be angry, just shrug their shoulders and say ‘that’s life’. People expect to be safe in their communities. The d demographic of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Scared and frightened people in a community are just racist in your world.
Give your head a wobble.
@kyf_100 is generally one of the good guys on here. I think you might be misinterpreting him
There are plenty of the usual suspects posting the usual woke lefty cant
Thanks.
What I'm saying in the above post is that _even if_ online reports are false, and the killer has no links to fundamentalism, isn't an immigrant, isn't even an ethnic minority... the reaction to the killing is very telling.
People are fed up with violence coming from what they regard as immigrant communities, be it up in Leeds in the Roma community, or the Manchester Airport debacle. To name but two from *checks notes* this month.
People are lashing out and blaming immigrants before it's actually been proven - but that in itself says a lot about how unchecked mass immigration has driven a massive wedge through our society. As per the poster earlier whose name escapes me, who commented that the whole of the UK is increasingly resembling a sectarian Northern Ireland.
It was me on the previous thread:
"Southport. Regardless of who did this incident.
Racial tensions can be temporary, such as when a large number of West Indians came and cultural grating, occured, particularly with youths.
However there was enough common culture (and goodwill) to enable integration within a generation or two.
However, when there is no cultural commonality, and a strong religious culture of a different religion which is all encompasing and frowns on marriage to outsiders, you end up with segregation.
What we are now seeing is a Falls and Bogside in many mainland cities and the working class native population reacting by starting to go all Shankhill/Riverside."
Only 2% of Rwandans are Muslim, with 90% either Catholic or Protestant, so a religious motivation is unlikely.
Cannabis induced paranoia and psychosis wouldn't surprise me though.
Potential ecological fallacy there.
I wouldn't rule out him being hooked on Andrew Tate stuff or something.
My personal theory is that (if not a complete loony) then it's going to be incel related. Look at the targets.
What 6-11 year old girls - I don’t think so and it’s not worth speculating
I think the target is fans of Taylor Swift, just as the target in Manchester was fans of Ariana Grande.
But wasn't the Manchester attack because being a young girl at a pop concert was unIslamic?
FWIW, I don't think your incel theory is any worse any other. No apparent motivation really makes sense.
Incel is a pretty good theory. He was apparently awkward and introverted, from a somewhat itinerant immigrant Rwandan family. 17 years old, no local girls remotely interested? A Taylor Swift gym and yoga class, staffed by pretty female teachers and young and mainly white girls - that would satisfy his angry sexual inadequacy and sense of social alienation
However, I would not be surprised by online radicalisation. Perhaps Islamic, perhaps not. He seems to have been quite careful in his targetting. This was not a random spasm, he carefully selected a group of victims at some distance from his home, and in an obscure building. He must have reconnoitred
I wouldn't be surprised if it was synthetic cannabinoids, tbh. Utterly endemic with the yoof, particularly in deprived towns. Another failure of prohibition.
Peter Hitchens will approve of this post
Probably not my last sentence, though!
Make weed cheap, legal and taxable, and you'd get regulated supply at safe dosages and the tax revenue might even go some way to plugging Rachel Reeves' £20bn hole.
Prohibition just incentivises unregulated, stronger research chemicals that are easier and cheaper to import in bulk. See also how Fentanyl has taken over the US.
Spice is a big problem in UK inner cities and small deprived towns, and I don't think most people of my generation or older realise how much more dangerous these drugs are than the weed and pills of our student days.
What makes you think making the less strong stuff legal will get people to stop using the stronger stuff illegally?
Because that's how legalisation works.
How many people go out and buy illegal, stronger booze.
When its legal, most people just go to the shop and buy what they want.
But there's nothing stopping people buying really strong alcohol, is there?
The critical bit is that the the alcohol percentage is known and reliable to a high degree (ha)
Also, your legal alcohol has no meths and other fun impurities.
Anyone who wants to know how strong their booze is need only look at the label for proof of its strength.
Missing your own point here. There's no form of alcohol which gets you drunker than legally available and properly labelled whisky. For any acceptable form of weed there's always going to be a strain or synthetic analog which gets you much much higher.
So?
Legalise them all and have honest labelling requirements.
Let people buy what they want from Tesco's. The dealers will soon be out of business.
England… wasn’t like this? Was it? We were the orderly quiet society of Orwell. A little dull, perhaps, but quaint, respectful and safe
They have to go
Who has to go?
The Tommy Robinson types committing violence? Sure, but where should they go, other than to our overfull jails?
As for not always like this, I remember being evacuated from my home by the Police after someone copycatted the London Riots. That was 13 years ago. There were even more serious riots decades earlier.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Reeves botches up her tax plan Miliband fks up energy policy Cooper has riots on the streets And Starmer gets booed for a 2 minute visit. ( why did he even bother ? )
And they already have their paws all over the triumphalist shitcanning of Rwanda, the optics of which are horrid in this context.
Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.
The pair of you are completely deluded. I am no fan of Labour and fully expect it to go pearshaped at some stage, but really it hasn't yet and won't for awhile. We are still in the honeymoon period and will be for sometime. The fact you think it is all over now just shows how biased you both are.
youre kidding yourself. Labour entered government with no clear plan now events are taking over, One of the factors you ignore is that Sunak lost the campaign, Labour didnt win it. And in that time where Labour stood back and said nothing, you interpreted as Labour competence. Whereas what we now see is their team isnt as strong as they presented. they are now increasibly defending their actions rather than dictating the agenda.
If Id told you there would be riots 4 weeks ago youd have called me deluded - and I would have probabaly agreed.
But there are.
Events
I’m not seeing it. We are in the rather boring early days of the new government. Nobody’s particularly doing anything exciting. There have been good and less good moments so far. By far the least good has been yet more cancelling of infrastructure investment. But I suspect they are doing other things you disapprove of, therefore you assume everyone else must too.
I understand your pain. Labour have simply had a short honeymoon and will be despartate for the summer recess. Reeves is making some confused decisions and if she intends to do all the bad news first its inevitable the honeymoon will be short.
Having spent a lot of time pre=election saying Labour will have to cut spending I had an ironoc laugh when they attacked the pensioners. All those Labourites telling me it was impossible to cut anything just had the rug pulled from under their feet. But cut as she has she must now pray for a mild winter or it will be December gloom as the media pile on the pressure with oldies freezing in their ice bound homes.
I’m a Lib Dem. There is no discernible pain to be felt yet. We have 72 seats. We may even benefit from the eventual Labour decline.
But for now any wishful thinking about Labour collapse is just that.
I can only assume that Alan thinks that because we are LDs were are just whimpy Labourites really, not aware that we can be as anti Labour as we are anti Conservatives. I presume he thinks we really support a Labour Govt and are therefore biased. We aren't, we don't, but the reality is it is early days and frankly the Labour Govt hasn't yet had a chance to upset the electors. Nothing to do with who you support. Just a fact of life.
There was a rather smart post on here earlier by someone about the way the UK is increasingly resembling sectarian Northern Ireland, with different groups that don't integrate.
Even if this tragedy turns out to have nothing to do with recent immigration, it's clear where the tensions are.
There’s three dead girls in large fridges at the moment who will never live the lives they had hoped for or their parents had hoped for and people in that community are scared and frightened and your posting shit like This.
Should they not be angry, just shrug their shoulders and say ‘that’s life’. People expect to be safe in their communities. The d demographic of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Scared and frightened people in a community are just racist in your world.
Give your head a wobble.
@kyf_100 is generally one of the good guys on here. I think you might be misinterpreting him
There are plenty of the usual suspects posting the usual woke lefty cant
Thanks.
What I'm saying in the above post is that _even if_ online reports are false, and the killer has no links to fundamentalism, isn't an immigrant, isn't even an ethnic minority... the reaction to the killing is very telling.
People are fed up with violence coming from what they regard as immigrant communities, be it up in Leeds in the Roma community, or the Manchester Airport debacle. To name but two from *checks notes* this month.
People are lashing out and blaming immigrants before it's actually been proven - but that in itself says a lot about how unchecked mass immigration has driven a massive wedge through our society. As per the poster earlier whose name escapes me, who commented that the whole of the UK is increasingly resembling a sectarian Northern Ireland.
It was me on the previous thread:
"Southport. Regardless of who did this incident.
Racial tensions can be temporary, such as when a large number of West Indians came and cultural grating, occured, particularly with youths.
However there was enough common culture (and goodwill) to enable integration within a generation or two.
However, when there is no cultural commonality, and a strong religious culture of a different religion which is all encompasing and frowns on marriage to outsiders, you end up with segregation.
What we are now seeing is a Falls and Bogside in many mainland cities and the working class native population reacting by starting to go all Shankhill/Riverside."
Only 2% of Rwandans are Muslim, with 90% either Catholic or Protestant, so a religious motivation is unlikely.
Cannabis induced paranoia and psychosis wouldn't surprise me though.
Potential ecological fallacy there.
I wouldn't rule out him being hooked on Andrew Tate stuff or something.
My personal theory is that (if not a complete loony) then it's going to be incel related. Look at the targets.
What 6-11 year old girls - I don’t think so and it’s not worth speculating
I think the target is fans of Taylor Swift, just as the target in Manchester was fans of Ariana Grande.
But wasn't the Manchester attack because being a young girl at a pop concert was unIslamic?
FWIW, I don't think your incel theory is any worse any other. No apparent motivation really makes sense.
Incel is a pretty good theory. He was apparently awkward and introverted, from a somewhat itinerant immigrant Rwandan family. 17 years old, no local girls remotely interested? A Taylor Swift gym and yoga class, staffed by pretty female teachers and young and mainly white girls - that would satisfy his angry sexual inadequacy and sense of social alienation
However, I would not be surprised by online radicalisation. Perhaps Islamic, perhaps not. He seems to have been quite careful in his targetting. This was not a random spasm, he carefully selected a group of victims at some distance from his home, and in an obscure building. He must have reconnoitred
I wouldn't be surprised if it was synthetic cannabinoids, tbh. Utterly endemic with the yoof, particularly in deprived towns. Another failure of prohibition.
Peter Hitchens will approve of this post
Probably not my last sentence, though!
Make weed cheap, legal and taxable, and you'd get regulated supply at safe dosages and the tax revenue might even go some way to plugging Rachel Reeves' £20bn hole.
Prohibition just incentivises unregulated, stronger research chemicals that are easier and cheaper to import in bulk. See also how Fentanyl has taken over the US.
Spice is a big problem in UK inner cities and small deprived towns, and I don't think most people of my generation or older realise how much more dangerous these drugs are than the weed and pills of our student days.
What makes you think making the less strong stuff legal will get people to stop using the stronger stuff illegally?
Because that's how legalisation works.
How many people go out and buy illegal, stronger booze.
When its legal, most people just go to the shop and buy what they want.
But there's nothing stopping people buying really strong alcohol, is there?
The critical bit is that the the alcohol percentage is known and reliable to a high degree (ha)
Also, your legal alcohol has no meths and other fun impurities.
Anyone who wants to know how strong their booze is need only look at the label for proof of its strength.
Missing your own point here. There's no form of alcohol which gets you drunker than legally available and properly labelled whisky. For any acceptable form of weed there's always going to be a strain or synthetic analog which gets you much much higher.
So?
Legalise them all and have honest labelling requirements.
Let people buy what they want from Tesco's. The dealers will soon be out of business.
Or Lidl / Aldi. Lower prices and higher quality.
Aldi UK is part of Aldi Süd which is the part that doesn't sell cigarettes.
It looks like the civil service are trying to repeat what they did with Dominic Raab, to Kemi Badenoch. Not sure it will work though, it feels more like something that will benefit her, given the timing of the claims.
The Olympics is a pile of shit. Not just this Olympics, all Olympics. What is the point of it?
What's the point of anything on a long enough timescale? What with deriding the opening ceremony and watching Pidcock mtbing I feel that my investment in the whole thing of £0.00 has been repaid already.
The Labour honeymoon is very swiftly coming to an end. A Tory PM would have handled the Southport situation better than Starmer has. He's got no righteous anger just mealy mouthed bullshit. He's got no way of stopping the idiots on the streets rioting either, he supports more immigration and more asylum seekers. He cancelled the deportation plan, he's closing the asylum ship and all he talks about is "processing more applications" or doing it faster which is just code for "accept more and do it faster" people aren't stupid.
If Labour doesn't do anything and the next Tory leader isn't careful I worry that Reform will take 5-10 points off Labour in 2029 and get 200 seats.
I haven't feared for the future of the country like this for a while, people in the streets targeting people who don't have white skin is the nightmare scenario and Labour spending the next 5 years letting in all and sundry at the border will only make it worse.
The nightmare scenario for Labour is that:
- incidents like Southport cost them the WWC support much of which they regained in 2024 - tax rises turn the middle classes away from them in droves - Starmer's stance on Gaza offends Muslims and Trump gets in and Starmer has to suck up to him so the far left stay at home - a bunch of scandals and banana skins make the last government look competent - increases in public spending don't result in better services - Net Zero is much more expensive even than the eye-watering forecasts, and the middle classes turn against it - NIMBYs partially defeat their housebuilding efforts, but are infuriated by them anyway.
Each of those is inherently plausible and some may already be happening, though obviously it would need staggering bad luck for all seven to crystallise and nothing offsetting to go right.
Anyway, that's why I think there's still all to play for in 2028-9.
The Labour honeymoon is very swiftly coming to an end. A Tory PM would have handled the Southport situation better than Starmer has. He's got no righteous anger just mealy mouthed bullshit. He's got no way of stopping the idiots on the streets rioting either, he supports more immigration and more asylum seekers. He cancelled the deportation plan, he's closing the asylum ship and all he talks about is "processing more applications" or doing it faster which is just code for "accept more and do it faster" people aren't stupid.
If Labour doesn't do anything and the next Tory leader isn't careful I worry that Reform will take 5-10 points off Labour in 2029 and get 200 seats.
I haven't feared for the future of the country like this for a while, people in the streets targeting people who don't have white skin is the nightmare scenario and Labour spending the next 5 years letting in all and sundry at the border will only make it worse.
This stuff is now daily occurrence. Nice summers evening, can't even go to the amusement park without a hold of mask wearing yuffs having a knife fight.
would never have happened in Richard Attenborough's day
It looks like the civil service are trying to repeat what they did with Dominic Raab, to Kemi Badenoch. Not sure it will work though, it feels more like something that will benefit her, given the timing of the claims.
Do right wingers here really think that rentamob Yaxley Lennons arriving in Southport to feast parasitically on its grief is a good look for them?
The same right wingers would be stating - rightly - that Gaza protestors shrieking about Jews or just stop oilers blocking ambulances are terrible optics for the left. But they seem to have a blind spot here.
These are your answer to just stop oil. They’re just as off putting.
Whatever you think of JSO, they don't go across the country to take advantage of mass murder, or set fire to police vans and punch officers. Describing their activities as violent rather than disruptive is a deliberate false equivalence, imo.
We need a new campaigning group, JSR. Just Stop Racism.
Do right wingers here really think that rentamob Yaxley Lennons arriving in Southport to feast parasitically on its grief is a good look for them?
The same right wingers would be stating - rightly - that Gaza protestors shrieking about Jews or just stop oilers blocking ambulances are terrible optics for the left. But they seem to have a blind spot here.
These are your answer to just stop oil. They’re just as off putting.
Obviously this sory of rioting is inherently a bad thing. And it does nothing to advance their cause. But I don't think there's a lot of strategic thinking going on.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Try "criminal justice accommodation". This is Sir Humphrey land.
eg To ensure faster delivery of other public service infrastructure such as further education colleges, hospitals and criminal justice accommodation, local planning authorities should also work proactively and positively with promoters, delivery partners and statutory bodies to plan for required facilities and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted. Significant weight should be placed on the importance of new, expanded or upgraded public service infrastructure when considering proposals for development.
"Significant weight" is NPPF code for "you need a bloody good reason not to give this heavy priority, and if it is appealed you may well lose". To overturn that there probably needs to be a showstopper, or an equally good Plan B.
I'm interested in how that works in with Prisons Reform. What it means is that say a former airfield or coalmine site would get strong preference for use as a prison or similar. I'd say that would also apply to asylum seeker or small boat people - difficult for Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh to resist.
I'd say they for one thing have no intention of spending £6 billion on keeping asylum seekers in hotels.
The Labour honeymoon is very swiftly coming to an end. A Tory PM would have handled the Southport situation better than Starmer has. He's got no righteous anger just mealy mouthed bullshit. He's got no way of stopping the idiots on the streets rioting either, he supports more immigration and more asylum seekers. He cancelled the deportation plan, he's closing the asylum ship and all he talks about is "processing more applications" or doing it faster which is just code for "accept more and do it faster" people aren't stupid.
If Labour doesn't do anything and the next Tory leader isn't careful I worry that Reform will take 5-10 points off Labour in 2029 and get 200 seats.
I haven't feared for the future of the country like this for a while, people in the streets targeting people who don't have white skin is the nightmare scenario and Labour spending the next 5 years letting in all and sundry at the border will only make it worse.
This stuff is now daily occurrence. Nice summers evening, can't even go to the amusement park without a hold of mask wearing yuffs having a knife fight.
would never have happened in Richard Attenborough's day
After careful consideration, I've decided not to endorse your park.
England… wasn’t like this? Was it? We were the orderly quiet society of Orwell. A little dull, perhaps, but quaint, respectful and safe
They have to go
Good grief you aren't that much younger than me and you don't remember the violence of the 70s. The skin heads, the NF, the football hooligans. I wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday. When I was at Uni at Manchester you didn't go out on a Sat afternoon if United were playing at home. The National Front trashed the UMIST union on one occasion and the police wouldn't turn up until it was over.
A thought about Andy Murray and Dan Evans. They avoid Nadal and Alcaraz in the Quarter Finals. They must be in with a chance of at least a bronze medal.
Hooray! An American poll using plus and minus the way God intended.
Two questions though.
When does Trump have to respond to the changing dynamics of the race?
What are the odds of Trump making things worse for himself?
Not panic stations yet. He's in a scrap not a rout.
I've mixed feelings on Trump's political judgment. On the one hand, he failed to get re-elected as incumbent President. On the other, he has a low cunning and ability to turn things that would have killed 100 political careers into a net positive.
Would need Georgia to flip blue and all above to stay blue for 270 if Penn goes to Trump. A tall order. Really this election is coming down to Penn isn’t it?
A thought about Andy Murray and Dan Evans. They avoid Nadal and Alcaraz in the Quarter Finals. They must be in with a chance of at least a bronze medal.
Are there play offs for third in tennis or do losing semi-finalists share bronze?
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The Olympics is a pile of shit. Not just this Olympics, all Olympics. What is the point of it?
What's the point of anything on a long enough timescale? What with deriding the opening ceremony and watching Pidcock mtbing I feel that my investment in the whole thing of £0.00 has been repaid already.
Hmm, a fair chunk of tax and/or National Lottery money has been spent on Olympic stuff. So not 0p. Maybe a few pounds, maybe more.
The Olympics is a pile of shit. Not just this Olympics, all Olympics. What is the point of it?
I'm as capable of a rant about the Olympics as the next man. Opening ceremonies are stupid, sports which require judges aren't real sports, sports where the Olympics is a sideshow shoulfn't be there, there are far, far, far too many swimming events, the coverage is inane and the whole thing is far too pleased with itself. But I don't think I'd describe it as 'shit'. I quite like the majority of it. I rather enjoyed the women's 7s this evening, for example.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
You keep repeating this "deeply unpopular" mantra but without saying whom it is unpopular with?
The people who move into new homes? They seem to appreciate having somewhere to live.
Or curtain twitching nobodies for whom its got bugger all to do with them?
AP (via Seattle Times) - Project 2025 director leaves Heritage Foundation after Democratic attacks and Trump criticism
The director of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 vision for a complete overhaul of the federal government stepped down Tuesday after facing pressure from Donald Trump’s campaign, which has tried to disavow a program created by many of the former president’s allies and former aides.
Paul Dans’ exit comes after the project “completed exactly what it set out to do: bringing together over 110 leading conservative organizations to create a unified conservative vision, motivated to devolve power from the unelected administrative state, and returning it to the people,” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts said in a statement.
Democrats for the past several months have made Project 2025 a key election-year cudgel, pointing to the ultraconservative policy blueprint as a glimpse into how extreme another Trump administration could be.
The nearly 1,000-page handbook lays out sweeping changes in the federal government, including altering personnel rules to ensure government workers are more loyal to the president.
“President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way,” Trump campaign advisers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said in a statement. “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.” . . .
SSI - You know that MAGA-manic World is in SEVERE FREAKOUT MODE when they start worrying about what Woke Libtards are saying about their shit.
Plenty of other indications, for example here on PB, but this is a truly spectacular eruption, given the deep influence of the Heritage Foundation over past right-wing thinking, and current impact upon (alleged) intellectuals such as JD Vance.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
A thought about Andy Murray and Dan Evans. They avoid Nadal and Alcaraz in the Quarter Finals. They must be in with a chance of at least a bronze medal.
Are there play offs for third in tennis or do losing semi-finalists share bronze?
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
US election really is a toss-up on current polling. If the election was tomorrow I'd have no idea who would win - well within a normal polling error either way.
But it's still over 3 months away, so what of the trends?
Momentum is with Harris with an excellent launch to her campaign that seems to have a buzz of positivity about it, raising large amounts and also attacking the Trump/Vance ticket successfully as 'weird', which seems to be going viral.
Can she keep up that positive narrative for 3 weeks until the Democratic convention where traditionally candidates get a boost? It seems quite possible.
Fingers crossed for the sake of US democracy, for Ukraine, and frankly for everywhere.
England… wasn’t like this? Was it? We were the orderly quiet society of Orwell. A little dull, perhaps, but quaint, respectful and safe
They have to go
Good grief you aren't that much younger than me and you don't remember the violence of the 70s. The skin heads, the NF, the football hooligans. I wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday. When I was at Uni at Manchester you didn't go out on a Sat afternoon if United were playing at home. The National Front trashed the UMIST union on one occasion and the police wouldn't turn up until it was over.
Life is much safer these days.
I still wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday or a Sunday to Friday inclusive. And are you sure Manchester has a university?
The Labour honeymoon is very swiftly coming to an end. A Tory PM would have handled the Southport situation better than Starmer has. He's got no righteous anger just mealy mouthed bullshit. He's got no way of stopping the idiots on the streets rioting either, he supports more immigration and more asylum seekers. He cancelled the deportation plan, he's closing the asylum ship and all he talks about is "processing more applications" or doing it faster which is just code for "accept more and do it faster" people aren't stupid.
If Labour doesn't do anything and the next Tory leader isn't careful I worry that Reform will take 5-10 points off Labour in 2029 and get 200 seats.
I haven't feared for the future of the country like this for a while, people in the streets targeting people who don't have white skin is the nightmare scenario and Labour spending the next 5 years letting in all and sundry at the border will only make it worse.
The nightmare scenario for Labour is that:
- incidents like Southport cost them the WWC support much of which they regained in 2024 - tax rises turn the middle classes away from them in droves - Starmer's stance on Gaza offends Muslims and Trump gets in and Starmer has to suck up to him so the far left stay at home - a bunch of scandals and banana skins make the last government look competent - increases in public spending don't result in better services - Net Zero is much more expensive even than the eye-watering forecasts, and the middle classes turn against it - NIMBYs partially defeat their housebuilding efforts, but are infuriated by them anyway.
Each of those is inherently plausible and some may already be happening, though obviously it would need staggering bad luck for all seven to crystallise and nothing offsetting to go right.
Anyway, that's why I think there's still all to play for in 2028-9.
It must be remembered that oddly for such a huge majority, this govt didn’t have a true honeymoon even on Day 1. A tired electorate shrugged them into power with fewer votes than Corbyn.
I expect we’ll see in no order, the ebbing way of the business lobby, dissatisfaction among the wwc, generally robust support among client voters, increasing apathy among blue to red switchers, possibly some coming home from red to greens.
But a result for Labour next time in the mid 20 percents is not out the question, particularly if we see an event which tips over their shopping trolley. US yield curves looking pretty threatening right now to be sure.
US election really is a toss-up on current polling. If the election was tomorrow I'd have no idea who would win - well within a normal polling error either way.
But it's still over 3 months away, so what of the trends?
Momentum is with Harris with an excellent launch to her campaign that seems to have a buzz of positivity about it, raising large amounts and also attacking the Trump/Vance ticket successfully as 'weird', which seems to be going viral.
Can she keep up that positive narrative for 3 weeks until the Democratic convention where traditionally candidates get a boost? It seems quite possible.
Fingers crossed for the sake of US democracy, for Ukraine, and frankly for everywhere.
Indeed. But she still has her veep choice to navigate.
The 'weird' thing might finally be the retribution that Trump deserves for all his bullying social media slogans.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
Incorrect. Unspoiled pastoral views and healthy organic house price growth are the finest features of old England. You know this as well as I do, deep down.
The planning changes look extremely consequential to me.
They’ve handed local authorities both the powers and the obligation to meet some very ambitious housing targets. And within quite a strictly defined timeframe.
There’s an artificial scarcity of building land thanks to the planning system.
AFAIKS, LAs now have something of a magic wand to selectively abolish local scarcities in pursuit of their house building targets. If they get enhanced compulsory purchase powers, it might also give them the financial wherewithal to build new LA housing.
The new presumptions in favour of economic development, and the loosening of local restrictions on building upwards, should please folk like @Gardenwalker .
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
Because the previous target was 46 homes and now its over 600 - I'm questioning whether the demand exists because 1) I don't think it does, 2) the profit doesn't exist given the price of existing homes...
Would need Georgia to flip blue and all above to stay blue for 270 if Penn goes to Trump. A tall order. Really this election is coming down to Penn isn’t it?
We’re about to find out how the GOP does when it panics.
The Democrats just passed that test.
I don't think they need to panic exactly, as of now Trump still leads the RCP average 48.1% for Trump to 46.1% for Harris which if replicated on election day would be only the second time this century the GOP presidential candidate has won the popular vote.
US election really is a toss-up on current polling. If the election was tomorrow I'd have no idea who would win - well within a normal polling error either way.
But it's still over 3 months away, so what of the trends?
Momentum is with Harris with an excellent launch to her campaign that seems to have a buzz of positivity about it, raising large amounts and also attacking the Trump/Vance ticket successfully as 'weird', which seems to be going viral.
Can she keep up that positive narrative for 3 weeks until the Democratic convention where traditionally candidates get a boost? It seems quite possible.
Fingers crossed for the sake of US democracy, for Ukraine, and frankly for everywhere.
Indeed. But she still has her veep choice to navigate.
The 'weird' thing might finally be the retribution that Trump deserves for all his bullying social media slogans.
In 2028, as he fumes into his mid-80s, full of rage and on a maga-drip (yours for only $500/ml! $350 if you buy a sub!) I can see us all here again watching those polling lines going up and down.
Would need Georgia to flip blue and all above to stay blue for 270 if Penn goes to Trump. A tall order. Really this election is coming down to Penn isn’t it?
Exactly, hence Harris if she has any sense picks Shapiro as her VP nominee
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
I think you’re wrong about that. They are game changers for housing development, too.
Would need Georgia to flip blue and all above to stay blue for 270 if Penn goes to Trump. A tall order. Really this election is coming down to Penn isn’t it?
NOTE that nobody in the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania EVER calls it "Penn". Which is reserved for the Quaker founder & his relations OR for the University of Pennsylvania. Though Pennsylvania State University is called "Penn State".
What Pennsylvanians from east (Philadelphia), center (Altoona) and west (Pittsburgh) call the old Keystone State, is "PA" pronounced "Pee A" (as in "say").
England… wasn’t like this? Was it? We were the orderly quiet society of Orwell. A little dull, perhaps, but quaint, respectful and safe
They have to go
Good grief you aren't that much younger than me and you don't remember the violence of the 70s. The skin heads, the NF, the football hooligans. I wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday. When I was at Uni at Manchester you didn't go out on a Sat afternoon if United were playing at home. The National Front trashed the UMIST union on one occasion and the police wouldn't turn up until it was over.
Life is much safer these days.
I still wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday or a Sunday to Friday inclusive. And are you sure Manchester has a university?
Yep one of the oldest and most highly rated both in my day as well as now, particularly for Mathematics. Surprised you are unaware.
The planning changes look extremely consequential to me.
They’ve handed local authorities both the powers and the obligation to meet some very ambitious housing targets. And within quite a strictly defined timeframe.
There’s an artificial scarcity of building land thanks to the planning system.
AFAIKS, LAs now have something of a magic wand to selectively abolish local scarcities in pursuit of their house building targets. If they get enhanced compulsory purchase powers, it might also give them the financial wherewithal to build new LA housing.
The new presumptions in favour of economic development, and the loosening of local restrictions on building upwards, should please folk like @Gardenwalker .
There has been serious planning corruption in the past here and I'm not convinced this won't encourage more of the same.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Try "criminal justice accommodation". This is Sir Humphrey land.
eg To ensure faster delivery of other public service infrastructure such as further education colleges, hospitals and criminal justice accommodation, local planning authorities should also work proactively and positively with promoters, delivery partners and statutory bodies to plan for required facilities and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted. Significant weight should be placed on the importance of new, expanded or upgraded public service infrastructure when considering proposals for development.
"Significant weight" is NPPF code for "you need a bloody good reason not to give this heavy priority, and if it is appealed you may well lose". To overturn that there probably needs to be a showstopper, or an equally good Plan B.
I'm interested in how that works in with Prisons Reform. What it means is that say a former airfield or coalmine site would get strong preference for use as a prison or similar. I'd say that would also apply to asylum seeker or small boat people - difficult for Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh to resist.
I'd say they for one thing have no intention of spending £6 billion on keeping asylum seekers in hotels.
Quite fun.
Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh had a proposed 100,000 housing development in their closing song for an episode in 1947.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
I think you’re wrong about that. They are game changers for housing development, too.
Let's remember how Starmer managed his time as leader of the opposition.
A lot of it was stuff that didn't look game-changing at first, didn't partitcularly look like it was working at first. But it did.
And yes, some (maybe lots) of that was about the government playing its poor hand badly, but some of it was skill. Pulling exactly the right sticks out of the kerplunk game at the right time.
It may not work, but this week is far far far too early to tell. And many of the bits of rubbish cleared away so far look sensible.
England… wasn’t like this? Was it? We were the orderly quiet society of Orwell. A little dull, perhaps, but quaint, respectful and safe
They have to go
Good grief you aren't that much younger than me and you don't remember the violence of the 70s. The skin heads, the NF, the football hooligans. I wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday. When I was at Uni at Manchester you didn't go out on a Sat afternoon if United were playing at home. The National Front trashed the UMIST union on one occasion and the police wouldn't turn up until it was over.
Life is much safer these days.
I still wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday or a Sunday to Friday inclusive. And are you sure Manchester has a university?
Yep one of the oldest and most highly rated both in my day as well as now, particularly for Mathematics. Surprised you are unaware.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
Because the previous target was 46 homes and now its over 600 - I'm questioning whether the demand exists because 1) I don't think it does, 2) the profit doesn't exist given the price of existing homes...
It absolutely exists in Cumbria (is it as vague as "Cumbria"? Haven't read article).
I struggle to think why anyone would want to live in Redcar.
US election really is a toss-up on current polling. If the election was tomorrow I'd have no idea who would win - well within a normal polling error either way.
But it's still over 3 months away, so what of the trends?
Momentum is with Harris with an excellent launch to her campaign that seems to have a buzz of positivity about it, raising large amounts and also attacking the Trump/Vance ticket successfully as 'weird', which seems to be going viral.
Can she keep up that positive narrative for 3 weeks until the Democratic convention where traditionally candidates get a boost? It seems quite possible.
Fingers crossed for the sake of US democracy, for Ukraine, and frankly for everywhere.
Indeed. But she still has her veep choice to navigate.
The 'weird' thing might finally be the retribution that Trump deserves for all his bullying social media slogans.
I think it goes a bit beyond that. There seems to be genuine Democratic enthusiasm for a Harris ticket.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
No we really don't. See Fig 3 of this ONS post, which shows clearly that affordability is appalling in the SE around London, and not really a problem in the north, especially the far north.
And that's despite the huge subsidies that southern England dishes out to the rest of the country every year, when the best thing to do would be to cut those off and let the regions find their natural population and economy activity levels.
It looks like the civil service are trying to repeat what they did with Dominic Raab, to Kemi Badenoch. Not sure it will work though, it feels more like something that will benefit her, given the timing of the claims.
I think it's more '5D chess' and Kemi is the party hierarchy's chosen right-winger, hence the strenuous efforts to make it seem like she's the victim of a centrist stitch up, so that right wingers rally round her. Has anything actually damaging or even particularly embarrassing come out?
TheScreamingEagles has told us in no uncertain terms that Kemi and Michael Gove aren't on speaking terms, but it was reported in the Telegraph the other day that he is writing all her speeches. That doesn't sound like a very serious estrangement to me.
She's OK, but speaking personally, I can't trust her. Lie down with some dirty old dogs like Williamson and Gove, and people will suspect you have fleas.
The justice system is absolutely fucking broken. I fear that in 7-10 years the child murderer will be walking the streets after being granted lifetime anonymity by some soft touch judge.
Even on that new battleground states poll Trump wins 270 to 268 if he wins Georgia, which is tied
You sound as authoritative as ever. Like you do about schools and colleges and universities which I have been to and you, not so much.
Yes well I don't subscribe to left liberal centrist groupthink on here and never will, this board is supposed to incorporate all opinions and views not be an echo chamber!
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
Because the previous target was 46 homes and now its over 600 - I'm questioning whether the demand exists because 1) I don't think it does, 2) the profit doesn't exist given the price of existing homes...
46 is pathetic! Thank goodness that's gone.
Why doesn't it?
A healthy house price to income ratio we should be aiming for is the 2-3x ratio it was back in the 1990s. House price to income ratios are far too high in Cumbria across the board.
As for demand, it exists. Again as we've discussed a few times, a healthy ratio should see 10% of dwellings unoccupied, as is standard in most of Europe and the globe, to allow would-be tenants and purchasers to choose to only live in affordable and maintained buildings and to say no to run-down ones unless its to purchase cheaply for refurbishment. Currently in Cumbria there are insufficient unoccupied dwellings so yes absolutely the demand is there.
We both have more demand and high prices in Cumbria, and I have no doubt it'll be the same in Redcar if I look into it. Just because there are more serious problems elsewhere doesn't mean there aren't problems there.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
The thing the FT picked up on is that the changes in new housing numbers seems to massively impact Redcar and Cumbria while areas that actually need a lot of housing (London) come away relatively unscathed.
I'm curious, why don't Redcar and Cumbria need housing in your eyes?
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
Because the previous target was 46 homes and now its over 600 - I'm questioning whether the demand exists because 1) I don't think it does, 2) the profit doesn't exist given the price of existing homes...
It absolutely exists in Cumbria (is it as vague as "Cumbria"? Haven't read article).
I struggle to think why anyone would want to live in Redcar.
Because it’s one of the few places that first time buyers can afford to buy a home. We need to build enough homes that first time buyers can afford to buy everywhere, even in NIMBY Lib Dem constituencies.
Some quite interesting stuff there, and some caution.
The solar farms one will make potentially a big difference. The Green Belt stuff looks sensible, which is one that could blow up unpredictably in Nimbyland.
The prisons one is an interesting one.
Changing the NPPF is always fraught, as the word by word nuances have a major impact on Planning Appeals.
Some things not addressed that need to be addressed - notable rural housing in small communities, but a lot of that requires action outside Planning Law.
Watch how the CPO reforms work with this.
Just had a quick flick through. Couldn't find anything about prisons except under 'Flood risk vulnerability classification'. Am I looking at the right document?
Do you know why councils currently don't spend time doing pre-application work. It's because they don't have the qualified staff to do it...
These are sensible proposals but not game changers, aside perhaps for onshore wind. It is really just the labour party reinstating a deeply unpopular system of housing targets, and then making some tweaks to the wording of the NPPF, which will be slowly litigated over the next ten years. The speculative planning applications will start coming forward again but this won't necessarily lead to the rapid delivery of housing in the way that is hoped; the delivery of housing depends on demand, and there isn't much of this.
I think you’re wrong about that. They are game changers for housing development, too.
Let's remember how Starmer managed his time as leader of the opposition.
A lot of it was stuff that didn't look game-changing at first, didn't partitcularly look like it was working at first. But it did.
And yes, some (maybe lots) of that was about the government playing its poor hand badly, but some of it was skill. Pulling exactly the right sticks out of the kerplunk game at the right time.
It may not work, but this week is far far far too early to tell. And many of the bits of rubbish cleared away so far look sensible.
They’re necessary, but not on their own sufficient for the government’s plans. Delivery could be frustrated by all manner of things - and it’s going to need legislation for some stuff.
But it’s a rapid step in the right direction - and given the extreme fiscal constraints, the one policy on which it’s actually possible for Labour to move the dial consequentially. Its success or failure perhaps determines the overall judgment on this Parliament.
England… wasn’t like this? Was it? We were the orderly quiet society of Orwell. A little dull, perhaps, but quaint, respectful and safe
They have to go
Good grief you aren't that much younger than me and you don't remember the violence of the 70s. The skin heads, the NF, the football hooligans. I wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday. When I was at Uni at Manchester you didn't go out on a Sat afternoon if United were playing at home. The National Front trashed the UMIST union on one occasion and the police wouldn't turn up until it was over.
Life is much safer these days.
I still wouldn't go into Woking centre on a Saturday or a Sunday to Friday inclusive. And are you sure Manchester has a university?
Yep one of the oldest and most highly rated both in my day as well as now, particularly for Mathematics. Surprised you are unaware.
LOL
Why the LOL? Are you are snob that can't accept a Northern Uni can be any good? In my day the top options were Oxbridge (which wasn't really an option from my background) then Imperial which would have meant living at home, which I didn't want to do. Next on the list was Manchester in the rankings and expected the highest grades for the offers I got.
The planning changes look extremely consequential to me.
They’ve handed local authorities both the powers and the obligation to meet some very ambitious housing targets. And within quite a strictly defined timeframe.
There’s an artificial scarcity of building land thanks to the planning system.
AFAIKS, LAs now have something of a magic wand to selectively abolish local scarcities in pursuit of their house building targets. If they get enhanced compulsory purchase powers, it might also give them the financial wherewithal to build new LA housing.
The new presumptions in favour of economic development, and the loosening of local restrictions on building upwards, should please folk like @Gardenwalker .
There has been serious planning corruption in the past here and I'm not convinced this won't encourage more of the same.
Some of the red tape was brought in for a reason.
Certainly a risk with so substantial an increase in LA powers.
Comments
They have to go
I don't know what is going on in Southport, whether the locals know something we don't or if they've been hopelessly misled by dodgy media sources. Or if it's a bunch of Tommy boy entryists. But there can be no excuse for rioting and disorder.
https://www.cypnow.co.uk/news/article/labour-conference-2023-yvette-cooper-reveals-sure-start-for-teenagers-plan
There is some dispute over the exact rise and patterns / trends differ e.g. in London it is supposedly down a bit. But one big one is the spread, it was really a London thing 10-15 years ago, now seeing big rises outside the capital in places that never really saw it before. I presume County Lines is a big part of that.
Also its any time of day or night, in really public places with loads of "civilians" about with absolutely massive weapons. Calling them knives is rather understating them.
We must mourn its loss.
I don't mind the midgies too much, annoying though they are.
Its the ticks I don't like.
You've had 14 years to rehearse this, and this is all you've got? And I thought the Paris Olympics committee were useless.
You could go with Keir is great which he obviously isn't (and don't get me started onReeves:s manifest inadequacy) so you are attacking on a team level. Fine. So you don't say Yay Keir you say Yay Labour. So then we take it that when you say Labour you mean, you know, Labour. So then I mention the year which was after 2002 and before 2004 and all hell breaks loose. Like waaaah I mean labour EXCEPT 2003 and those Iraqi children were not South African anyway and I just can't believe your bad taste in bringing that up again, what sort of monster are you?
Lie to the House of Commons about WMD, lie to the HoC about a few bottles of generic screwtop Chardonnay. Johnson is truly the last word in pure evil.
Arizona - 🔵 Harris +2
Georgia - 🟡 Tie
Michigan - 🔵 Harris +11
Nevada - 🔵 Harris +1
Wisconsin - 🔵 Harris +2
Pennsylvania - 🔴 Trump +4
North Carolina - 🔴 Trump +2
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1818390895240298809
The Tommy Robinson types committing violence? Sure, but where should they go, other than to our overfull jails?
As for not always like this, I remember being evacuated from my home by the Police after someone copycatted the London Riots. That was 13 years ago. There were even more serious riots decades earlier.
There's always been crime.
2024 National GE (Shift since 7/8):
Harris 45% (+8)
Trump 43% (-1)
Kennedy 5% (-3)
.@RedfieldWilton, 1,750 LV, 7/29
Bet accordingly kids.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/30/kemi-badenoch-accused-of-bullying-and-traumatising-staff
HarrisX/Harvard | July 26-28 | 2,196 RV
🟥Trump 52% (+4)
🟦Harris 48%
Florida Atlantic/Mainstreet | July 26-27 | 952 RV
🟥Trump 46% (even)
🟦Harris 46%
https://x.com/ElectionTime_/status/1818380487183983032
- incidents like Southport cost them the WWC support much of which they regained in 2024
- tax rises turn the middle classes away from them in droves
- Starmer's stance on Gaza offends Muslims and Trump gets in and Starmer has to suck up to him so the far left stay at home
- a bunch of scandals and banana skins make the last government look competent
- increases in public spending don't result in better services
- Net Zero is much more expensive even than the eye-watering forecasts, and the middle classes turn against it
- NIMBYs partially defeat their housebuilding efforts, but are infuriated by them anyway.
Each of those is inherently plausible and some may already be happening, though obviously it would need staggering bad luck for all seven to crystallise and nothing offsetting to go right.
Anyway, that's why I think there's still all to play for in 2028-9.
Two questions though.
When does Trump have to respond to the changing dynamics of the race?
What are the odds of Trump making things worse for himself?
Alok Sharma ‘bullied’ civil servants by calling them as they worked from home
Try "criminal justice accommodation". This is Sir Humphrey land.
eg
To ensure faster delivery of other public service infrastructure such as further
education colleges, hospitals and criminal justice accommodation, local planning
authorities should also work proactively and positively with promoters, delivery
partners and statutory bodies to plan for required facilities and resolve key
planning issues before applications are submitted. Significant weight should be
placed on the importance of new, expanded or upgraded public service
infrastructure when considering proposals for development.
"Significant weight" is NPPF code for "you need a bloody good reason not to give this heavy priority, and if it is appealed you may well lose". To overturn that there probably needs to be a showstopper, or an equally good Plan B.
I'm interested in how that works in with Prisons Reform. What it means is that say a former airfield or coalmine site would get strong preference for use as a prison or similar. I'd say that would also apply to asylum seeker or small boat people - difficult for Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh to resist.
I'd say they for one thing have no intention of spending £6 billion on keeping asylum seekers in hotels.
Life is much safer these days.
I've mixed feelings on Trump's political judgment. On the one hand, he failed to get re-elected as incumbent President. On the other, he has a low cunning and ability to turn things that would have killed 100 political careers into a net positive.
But I don't think I'd describe it as 'shit'. I quite like the majority of it. I rather enjoyed the women's 7s this evening, for example.
The people who move into new homes? They seem to appreciate having somewhere to live.
Or curtain twitching nobodies for whom its got bugger all to do with them?
The Democrats just passed that test.
The director of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 vision for a complete overhaul of the federal government stepped down Tuesday after facing pressure from Donald Trump’s campaign, which has tried to disavow a program created by many of the former president’s allies and former aides.
Paul Dans’ exit comes after the project “completed exactly what it set out to do: bringing together over 110 leading conservative organizations to create a unified conservative vision, motivated to devolve power from the unelected administrative state, and returning it to the people,” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts said in a statement.
Democrats for the past several months have made Project 2025 a key election-year cudgel, pointing to the ultraconservative policy blueprint as a glimpse into how extreme another Trump administration could be.
The nearly 1,000-page handbook lays out sweeping changes in the federal government, including altering personnel rules to ensure government workers are more loyal to the president.
“President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way,” Trump campaign advisers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said in a statement. “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.” . . .
SSI - You know that MAGA-manic World is in SEVERE FREAKOUT MODE when they start worrying about what Woke Libtards are saying about their shit.
Plenty of other indications, for example here on PB, but this is a truly spectacular eruption, given the deep influence of the Heritage Foundation over past right-wing thinking, and current impact upon (alleged) intellectuals such as JD Vance.
We need a lot of housing everywhere.
But it's still over 3 months away, so what of the trends?
Momentum is with Harris with an excellent launch to her campaign that seems to have a buzz of positivity about it, raising large amounts and also attacking the Trump/Vance ticket successfully as 'weird', which seems to be going viral.
Can she keep up that positive narrative for 3 weeks until the Democratic convention where traditionally candidates get a boost? It seems quite possible.
Fingers crossed for the sake of US democracy, for Ukraine, and frankly for everywhere.
I expect we’ll see in no order, the ebbing way of the business lobby, dissatisfaction among the wwc, generally robust support among client voters, increasing apathy among blue to red switchers, possibly some coming home from red to greens.
But a result for Labour next time in the mid 20 percents is not out the question, particularly if we see an event which tips over their shopping trolley. US yield curves looking pretty threatening right now to be sure.
The 'weird' thing might finally be the retribution that Trump deserves for all his bullying social media slogans.
Bring in Halley?
They’ve handed local authorities both the powers and the obligation to meet some very ambitious housing targets. And within quite a strictly defined timeframe.
There’s an artificial scarcity of building land thanks to the planning system.
AFAIKS, LAs now have something of a magic wand to selectively abolish local scarcities in pursuit of their house building targets. If they get enhanced compulsory purchase powers, it might also give them the financial wherewithal to build new LA housing.
The new presumptions in favour of economic development, and the loosening of local restrictions on building upwards, should please folk like @Gardenwalker .
https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1818324204661420291?t=fS8X_yOlGeNbCRqXn_3FPw&s=19
The other occasion being 2004 when Bush beat Kerry to win re election
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-harris
They are game changers for housing development, too.
What Pennsylvanians from east (Philadelphia), center (Altoona) and west (Pittsburgh) call the old Keystone State, is "PA" pronounced "Pee A" (as in "say").
From PsychoPAC - the Anti-Psychopath Political Action Committee, which is run by Kelly-Ann Conway's husband if I have it right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua005qdA8Yk
Sorry - but there are very few people I hold in lower regard.
Some of the red tape was brought in for a reason.
Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh had a proposed 100,000 housing development in their closing song for an episode in 1947.
https://youtu.be/BYhhqEEDX54?t=1636
A lot of it was stuff that didn't look game-changing at first, didn't partitcularly look like it was working at first. But it did.
And yes, some (maybe lots) of that was about the government playing its poor hand badly, but some of it was skill. Pulling exactly the right sticks out of the kerplunk game at the right time.
It may not work, but this week is far far far too early to tell. And many of the bits of rubbish cleared away so far look sensible.
I struggle to think why anyone would want to live in Redcar.
There seems to be genuine Democratic enthusiasm for a Harris ticket.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/bulletins/housingaffordabilityinenglandandwales/2022
And that's despite the huge subsidies that southern England dishes out to the rest of the country every year, when the best thing to do would be to cut those off and let the regions find their natural population and economy activity levels.
TheScreamingEagles has told us in no uncertain terms that Kemi and Michael Gove aren't on speaking terms, but it was reported in the Telegraph the other day that he is writing all her speeches. That doesn't sound like a very serious estrangement to me.
She's OK, but speaking personally, I can't trust her. Lie down with some dirty old dogs like Williamson and Gove, and people will suspect you have fleas.
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/1818258556610572445
The justice system is absolutely fucking broken. I fear that in 7-10 years the child murderer will be walking the streets after being granted lifetime anonymity by some soft touch judge.
Why doesn't it?
A healthy house price to income ratio we should be aiming for is the 2-3x ratio it was back in the 1990s. House price to income ratios are far too high in Cumbria across the board.
As for demand, it exists. Again as we've discussed a few times, a healthy ratio should see 10% of dwellings unoccupied, as is standard in most of Europe and the globe, to allow would-be tenants and purchasers to choose to only live in affordable and maintained buildings and to say no to run-down ones unless its to purchase cheaply for refurbishment. Currently in Cumbria there are insufficient unoccupied dwellings so yes absolutely the demand is there.
We both have more demand and high prices in Cumbria, and I have no doubt it'll be the same in Redcar if I look into it. Just because there are more serious problems elsewhere doesn't mean there aren't problems there.
Delivery could be frustrated by all manner of things - and it’s going to need legislation for some stuff.
But it’s a rapid step in the right direction - and given the extreme fiscal constraints, the one policy on which it’s actually possible for Labour to move the dial consequentially.
Its success or failure perhaps determines the overall judgment on this Parliament.