"Germany recorded more than 1,000 coronavirus-related deaths in one day for the first time on Wednesday, days after it started vaccinating people and as an extension of a lockdown looms.
The number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the country rose by 22,459 to 1,687,185, data from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) for infectious diseases showed.
The reported death toll increased by 1,129 to 32,107."
Damn that is bad. It was countries like Germany that gave us hope there was a right way to do this.
Do people think this is primarily because they have been caught out by the new, more infectious, virus strain or have they slipped up somewhere from their previous tight controls?
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
Now the Brexit deal is confirmed, there is no possible justification for Johnson to persevere with his spectacularly useless, nodding dog, cabinet. Even among the current massed ranks of dull, dim-witted, disingenuous Tory MPs, there must be better than the current crop of ministers.
It's a good point. But I imagine he has got used to it.
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
No need to renegotiate something when you are outside it and if you think the same EU coastal states will give up their access to UK waters to help the SNP you are in fairy land
Now the Brexit deal is confirmed, there is no possible justification for Johnson to persevere with his spectacularly useless, nodding dog, cabinet. Even among the current massed ranks of dull, dim-witted, disingenuous Tory MPs, there must be better than the current crop of ministers.
There will be a major reshuffle, sooner rather than later. So I'm told.
981 deaths announced. Essex calls in the military for desperate help with the ill. Professor Whitty is seen working over Christmas in a ward to help with the extreme overstretch.
Meanwhile, Toby Young (the one who keeps calling Professor Whitty “Witless” for his strange insistence that there is, in fact, a problem) keeps penning pieces on how the NHS are doing fine, less stretched than in other years, and they’re just making it up when they say that there’s a problem from these false positives.
At what point do his readers finally conclude that he’s delusional or crooked?
His detractors only have to counter his figures with better ones on ICU occupancy to destroy his argument.
They haven;t. as far as I can see. All they have is bluster and anecdote.
I wish somebody would. Genuinely.
Hope this helps (although I, for some reason, have a strange feeling it will not):
That is indeed an interesting graph and it does show above average numbers in critical care in November. It would be especially striking if there were fewer ICU beds than previous years. I think Young contended the bed numbers are higher and that's why what he produced was percentages. But I am not sure.
Its also worth noting that the graphic shows ICU usage was below average even during some periods of quite heavy restrictions. (EG May).
"Germany recorded more than 1,000 coronavirus-related deaths in one day for the first time on Wednesday, days after it started vaccinating people and as an extension of a lockdown looms.
The number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the country rose by 22,459 to 1,687,185, data from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) for infectious diseases showed.
The reported death toll increased by 1,129 to 32,107."
Damn that is bad. It was countries like Germany that gave us hope there was a right way to do this.
Do people think this is primarily because they have been caught out by the new, more infectious, virus strain or have they slipped up somewhere from their previous tight controls?
They tried a diet lockdown approach and it failed.
In England primary schools to open on the 4th January
I take it he does know most schools will have INSET on Monday?
He should say, 'next week.'
Only if you think 'most' means 'all'. I don't like the man but the shriller you get the less effective you are.
I have never worked in a school - and I've worked in five - that did not have INSET on the first Monday of January. That doesn't mean there aren't any, but it's unusual in my experience. He is sending out confused messages for no reason.
And he is waffling like you can't believe it right now.
We were not due to. We did have one the Monday after the Autumn half-term though.
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
No need to renegotiate something when you are outside it and if you think the same EU coastal states will give up their access to UK waters to help the SNP you are in fairy land
Your party betraqyed the fisherfolk.
Your party has done it twice now.
Your party has taken us Scots outside the EU after promising in 2014 that voting no to indy was the only way to stay in the EU.
You are blaming someone else for all of this. Divert, distract, fail to take responsibiliuty for your glorious Brexit and your glorious Union.
I wouldn't dream of accusing you of being in fairy land because it would be such an insult at your age.
Covid-19 really demonstrates how much many of us suffer from cognitive dissonance.
The people who thought that the second wave was all due to testing errors are the same people who seem to think that hospitals and intensive care units in much of the country are not at capacity.
Pfizer warns there is NO proof its Covid jab works when doses are taken 12 weeks apart as UK regulator scraps 21-day rule in desperate attempt to get millions more vaccinated
I retract all the nice comments I said about the government's approach on vaccines.
You mean the JVIC, they're the ones recommending moving to "up to 12 weeks".
Are you saying the government should ignore their advice?
Yes, they're wrong. They've made a series of bad decisions since the procurement taskforce was disbanded. Everything we've done since building the world's best portfolio has been a disaster. Roll out, prioritisation and now ignoring pharma advice on dosing. All of these should be done better and the people in charge are clueless.
Surely it is not pharma who are the experts on dosage and timing of vaccines, but virologists (on individual immunological response) and (for societal impact) epidemiologists.
981 deaths announced. Essex calls in the military for desperate help with the ill. Professor Whitty is seen working over Christmas in a ward to help with the extreme overstretch.
Meanwhile, Toby Young (the one who keeps calling Professor Whitty “Witless” for his strange insistence that there is, in fact, a problem) keeps penning pieces on how the NHS are doing fine, less stretched than in other years, and they’re just making it up when they say that there’s a problem from these false positives.
At what point do his readers finally conclude that he’s delusional or crooked?
His detractors only have to counter his figures with better ones on ICU occupancy to destroy his argument.
They haven;t. as far as I can see. All they have is bluster and anecdote.
I wish somebody would. Genuinely.
Hope this helps (although I, for some reason, have a strange feeling it will not):
That is indeed an interesting graph and it does show above average numbers in critical care in November. It would be especially striking if there were fewer ICU beds than previous years. I think Young contended the bed numbers are higher and that's why what he produced was percentages. But I am not sure.
Its also worth noting that the graphic shows ICU usage was below average even during some periods of quite heavy restrictions. (EG May).
Actually a bit above average in May, but it was indeed coming down nicely by the tail end of the period of heaviest restrictions.
The scariest bit is when you compare the non-covid blue colours to the last five years (which always cluster closely) and reflect on the scale of other hospital activity that’s been crowded out by the rising covid tide.
(Does Young suggest who should man extra beds? I believe training up doctors and ICU-trained nurses is a long process, and the staffing issue is exacerbated by staff getting covid or having to isolate.)
Now the Brexit deal is confirmed, there is no possible justification for Johnson to persevere with his spectacularly useless, nodding dog, cabinet. Even among the current massed ranks of dull, dim-witted, disingenuous Tory MPs, there must be better than the current crop of ministers.
There will be a major reshuffle, sooner rather than later. So I'm told.
I may have a chance to buy 1/3rd acre of land behind by garden. I currently rent it from the landowner. How can a fair price be established? Would it be a multiple of the rent or is there a per acre guide for "garden land". There is no development potential and the land is on a slope and is no use to a farmer or as a horse paddock.
Alternatively, would the adjusted garden size - which would be increasing sixfold I guess - put value on my house? And if so would the current landowner argue for the extra value?
Finally, would there be a separate land ownership for the land in isolation with the land registry, or would the boundaries of my current plot be expanded to envelope the new land? Are there any stamp duty implications either way?
Any help much appreciated.
I disagree with most of the others on this except perhaps @TimT and @MarqueeMark.
It is a marketplace of one buyer and one seller, so considerations such as "fair market price" are peripheral at best. It is worth what you will buy it for and the Great Estate will sell it for, nothing else.
You need to put yourself in their head and do a cost benefit from their point of view.
I would punt that they have let it for a relative peppercorn because it saves them having to spend some time and £200-£500 a year + admin managing it.
I would say it may add value to your house, but perhaps only 1-3%, for the correct buyer. If your street is all samey then it is an advantage.
Planning: the content of the rental agreement is private, and therefore not a Relevant Planning Matter; they could claim it was an elephant for all it matters. Though long term proven usage as a garden may give you a right to do so by prescription if no one has attempted to enforce. You would need I think 10 years proven use. Perhaps buy it with "can't be sure it is garden" as your argument, then serve your proof on the Council later. Though the GE surely know their planning stuff.
Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years, whether the transaction is big enough to be worth the bother etc. They could use it eg as part of the compulsory 10% open space in a medium sized estate to allow more houses on the flat bit, or as a quid pro quo to make another development acceptable (which was what Sarah Beeny did).
Don't forget that in a couple of years they may be able to gain an income from "public funds for public goods" by turning it into a wildlife meadow or a copse.
I would say that anything under 20k will not be worth the hassle for them, so perhaps start with 20k + an overage clause, and willing to go to double or treble that, and paying costs. Expect maybe 2k to 5k costs if you have a custom agreement. You could even offer a preemptive right ro repurchase at double plus land inflation.
Can you get some neighbours to make parallel offers, to make it a bigger deal?
On the parcel, you either have the buggeration of combining now, or of combining them when you sell. I would do it now, as time is of the essence when selling.
There is a sweet spot for you in that Stamp Duty does not apply (I think) on transactions under 40k.
Gosh @MattW that`s a great post - I don`t know where to start. (And @Gallowgate for your continued interest.)
A few things:
You ask "Can you get an area TPO on the whole thing before you conversation, such that it will make it a little less attractive as potential development?" My garden is in a conservation area. The land in question is just the other side of the conservation area boundary. There are fruit trees and a few conifers on the land. I don`t think a TPO is relevant.
The current rent that I pay to the Estate is £600 pa and this tends to rise with inflation. So not a peppercorn. Basically, I`ve been paying for the privilege of cutting the grass and the boundary hedges!
DavidL suggested 5 x this and I said that, knowing the Estate, they would not accept less than 25x. Your comments of £20k plus (plus costs) makes sense to me (getting into their head, as you say). The way I look at it is that I am committed to £600 plus inflation each year. I know I`m not really committed - but I am in reality because the land connects to my garden and I feel that it is essential to protect my outlook. (The land does not connect to anyone else`s garden.) Put simply, I wouldn`t want anyone else to rent it or own it. We have no plans to move ever so regarding this as a £600 pa plus inflation commitment leads me to think that paying, say, £30k one-off to extinguish this annual commitment is a good deal for me regardless of the value it may put on my house.
What would make it much less attractive to me is if they do like they usually do and impose restrictive covenants. I would want to have the scope of erecting a treehouse and possibly a greenhouse which the covenants usually prohibit. Mainly I would use it as a wildflower meadow and plant additional trees. it would be an environmental project for me. "Public funds for public goods" would, I think, imply public access, which would not be relevant in this case.
You say "Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years". Yes, it is an awkward parcel and is on a gradient so severe that I have to take it diagonally with my ride-on mower. It is of no use to a farmer or horse owner and could never be developed.
Regarding combining parcels of land, wouldn`t ot be better to keep them separate to give any prospective future buyer of our house the option of having a smaller garden or a really big one?
You can definitely used to get grants to plant trees regardless of public access. 1/3 acre might be a bit small though. There also used to be stewardship schemes although it isn't clear what these are going to be replaced with yet.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
Now the Brexit deal is confirmed, there is no possible justification for Johnson to persevere with his spectacularly useless, nodding dog, cabinet. Even among the current massed ranks of dull, dim-witted, disingenuous Tory MPs, there must be better than the current crop of ministers.
It's a good point. But I imagine he has got used to it.
The problem is that the worst example of the "dull, dim-witted, disingenuous" is the PM himself. They are simply a reflection of their incompetent and morally vacuous boss.
I may have a chance to buy 1/3rd acre of land behind by garden. I currently rent it from the landowner. How can a fair price be established? Would it be a multiple of the rent or is there a per acre guide for "garden land". There is no development potential and the land is on a slope and is no use to a farmer or as a horse paddock.
Alternatively, would the adjusted garden size - which would be increasing sixfold I guess - put value on my house? And if so would the current landowner argue for the extra value?
Finally, would there be a separate land ownership for the land in isolation with the land registry, or would the boundaries of my current plot be expanded to envelope the new land? Are there any stamp duty implications either way?
Any help much appreciated.
I disagree with most of the others on this except perhaps @TimT and @MarqueeMark.
It is a marketplace of one buyer and one seller, so considerations such as "fair market price" are peripheral at best. It is worth what you will buy it for and the Great Estate will sell it for, nothing else.
You need to put yourself in their head and do a cost benefit from their point of view.
I would punt that they have let it for a relative peppercorn because it saves them having to spend some time and £200-£500 a year + admin managing it.
I would say it may add value to your house, but perhaps only 1-3%, for the correct buyer. If your street is all samey then it is an advantage.
Planning: the content of the rental agreement is private, and therefore not a Relevant Planning Matter; they could claim it was an elephant for all it matters. Though long term proven usage as a garden may give you a right to do so by prescription if no one has attempted to enforce. You would need I think 10 years proven use. Perhaps buy it with "can't be sure it is garden" as your argument, then serve your proof on the Council later. Though the GE surely know their planning stuff.
Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years, whether the transaction is big enough to be worth the bother etc. They could use it eg as part of the compulsory 10% open space in a medium sized estate to allow more houses on the flat bit, or as a quid pro quo to make another development acceptable (which was what Sarah Beeny did).
Don't forget that in a couple of years they may be able to gain an income from "public funds for public goods" by turning it into a wildlife meadow or a copse.
I would say that anything under 20k will not be worth the hassle for them, so perhaps start with 20k + an overage clause, and willing to go to double or treble that, and paying costs. Expect maybe 2k to 5k costs if you have a custom agreement. You could even offer a preemptive right ro repurchase at double plus land inflation.
Can you get some neighbours to make parallel offers, to make it a bigger deal?
On the parcel, you either have the buggeration of combining now, or of combining them when you sell. I would do it now, as time is of the essence when selling.
There is a sweet spot for you in that Stamp Duty does not apply (I think) on transactions under 40k.
Gosh @MattW that`s a great post - I don`t know where to start. (And @Gallowgate for your continued interest.)
A few things:
You ask "Can you get an area TPO on the whole thing before you conversation, such that it will make it a little less attractive as potential development?" My garden is in a conservation area. The land in question is just the other side of the conservation area boundary. There are fruit trees and a few conifers on the land. I don`t think a TPO is relevant.
The current rent that I pay to the Estate is £600 pa and this tends to rise with inflation. So not a peppercorn. Basically, I`ve been paying for the privilege of cutting the grass and the boundary hedges!
DavidL suggested 5 x this and I said that, knowing the Estate, they would not accept less than 25x. Your comments of £20k plus (plus costs) makes sense to me (getting into their head, as you say). The way I look at it is that I am committed to £600 plus inflation each year. I know I`m not really committed - but I am in reality because the land connects to my garden and I feel that it is essential to protect my outlook. (The land does not connect to anyone else`s garden.) Put simply, I wouldn`t want anyone else to rent it or own it. We have no plans to move ever so regarding this as a £600 pa plus inflation commitment leads me to think that paying, say, £30k one-off to extinguish this annual commitment is a good deal for me regardless of the value it may put on my house.
What would make it much less attractive to me is if they do like they usually do and impose restrictive covenants. I would want to have the scope of erecting a treehouse and possibly a greenhouse which the covenants usually prohibit. Mainly I would use it as a wildflower meadow and plant additional trees. it would be an environmental project for me. "Public funds for public goods" would, I think, imply public access, which would not be relevant in this case.
You say "Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years". Yes, it is an awkward parcel and is on a gradient so severe that I have to take it diagonally with my ride-on mower. It is of no use to a farmer or horse owner and could never be developed.
Regarding combining parcels of land, wouldn`t ot be better to keep them separate to give any prospective future buyer of our house the option of having a smaller garden or a really big one?
You can definitely used to get grants to plant trees regardless of public access. 1/3 acre might be a bit small though. There also used to be stewardship schemes although it isn't clear what these are going to be replaced with yet.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
Bear in mind planting a tree costs a maximum of about £5, including tree, stake and treeguard.
In England primary schools to open on the 4th January
I take it he does know most schools will have INSET on Monday?
He should say, 'next week.'
Only if you think 'most' means 'all'. I don't like the man but the shriller you get the less effective you are.
I have never worked in a school - and I've worked in five - that did not have INSET on the first Monday of January. That doesn't mean there aren't any, but it's unusual in my experience. He is sending out confused messages for no reason.
And he is waffling like you can't believe it right now.
We were not due to. We did have one the Monday after the Autumn half-term though.
Whereas we didn’t, but we have one on Monday.
So unnecessary though. All he had to do was say, ‘go back on the original date in the week beginning 4th January.’ But he couldn’t even do that.
I suppose it’s some achievement to be more useless than Chris Grayling, but even so...
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
No need to renegotiate something when you are outside it and if you think the same EU coastal states will give up their access to UK waters to help the SNP you are in fairy land
Your party betraqyed the fisherfolk.
Your party has done it twice now.
Your party has taken us Scots outside the EU after promising in 2014 that voting no to indy was the only way to stay in the EU.
You are blaming someone else for all of this. Divert, distract, fail to take responsibiliuty for your glorious Brexit and your glorious Union.
I wouldn't dream of accusing you of being in fairy land because it would be such an insult at your age.
And Scotland will vote to stay in the union when and if indyref2 happens
Now the Brexit deal is confirmed, there is no possible justification for Johnson to persevere with his spectacularly useless, nodding dog, cabinet. Even among the current massed ranks of dull, dim-witted, disingenuous Tory MPs, there must be better than the current crop of ministers.
It's a good point. But I imagine he has got used to it.
The problem is that the worst example of the "dull, dim-witted, disingenuous" is the PM himself. They are simply a reflection of their incompetent and morally vacuous boss.
I may have a chance to buy 1/3rd acre of land behind by garden. I currently rent it from the landowner. How can a fair price be established? Would it be a multiple of the rent or is there a per acre guide for "garden land". There is no development potential and the land is on a slope and is no use to a farmer or as a horse paddock.
Alternatively, would the adjusted garden size - which would be increasing sixfold I guess - put value on my house? And if so would the current landowner argue for the extra value?
Finally, would there be a separate land ownership for the land in isolation with the land registry, or would the boundaries of my current plot be expanded to envelope the new land? Are there any stamp duty implications either way?
Any help much appreciated.
I disagree with most of the others on this except perhaps @TimT and @MarqueeMark.
It is a marketplace of one buyer and one seller, so considerations such as "fair market price" are peripheral at best. It is worth what you will buy it for and the Great Estate will sell it for, nothing else.
You need to put yourself in their head and do a cost benefit from their point of view.
I would punt that they have let it for a relative peppercorn because it saves them having to spend some time and £200-£500 a year + admin managing it.
I would say it may add value to your house, but perhaps only 1-3%, for the correct buyer. If your street is all samey then it is an advantage.
Planning: the content of the rental agreement is private, and therefore not a Relevant Planning Matter; they could claim it was an elephant for all it matters. Though long term proven usage as a garden may give you a right to do so by prescription if no one has attempted to enforce. You would need I think 10 years proven use. Perhaps buy it with "can't be sure it is garden" as your argument, then serve your proof on the Council later. Though the GE surely know their planning stuff.
Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years, whether the transaction is big enough to be worth the bother etc. They could use it eg as part of the compulsory 10% open space in a medium sized estate to allow more houses on the flat bit, or as a quid pro quo to make another development acceptable (which was what Sarah Beeny did).
Don't forget that in a couple of years they may be able to gain an income from "public funds for public goods" by turning it into a wildlife meadow or a copse.
I would say that anything under 20k will not be worth the hassle for them, so perhaps start with 20k + an overage clause, and willing to go to double or treble that, and paying costs. Expect maybe 2k to 5k costs if you have a custom agreement. You could even offer a preemptive right ro repurchase at double plus land inflation.
Can you get some neighbours to make parallel offers, to make it a bigger deal?
On the parcel, you either have the buggeration of combining now, or of combining them when you sell. I would do it now, as time is of the essence when selling.
There is a sweet spot for you in that Stamp Duty does not apply (I think) on transactions under 40k.
Gosh @MattW that`s a great post - I don`t know where to start. (And @Gallowgate for your continued interest.)
A few things:
You ask "Can you get an area TPO on the whole thing before you conversation, such that it will make it a little less attractive as potential development?" My garden is in a conservation area. The land in question is just the other side of the conservation area boundary. There are fruit trees and a few conifers on the land. I don`t think a TPO is relevant.
The current rent that I pay to the Estate is £600 pa and this tends to rise with inflation. So not a peppercorn. Basically, I`ve been paying for the privilege of cutting the grass and the boundary hedges!
DavidL suggested 5 x this and I said that, knowing the Estate, they would not accept less than 25x. Your comments of £20k plus (plus costs) makes sense to me (getting into their head, as you say). The way I look at it is that I am committed to £600 plus inflation each year. I know I`m not really committed - but I am in reality because the land connects to my garden and I feel that it is essential to protect my outlook. (The land does not connect to anyone else`s garden.) Put simply, I wouldn`t want anyone else to rent it or own it. We have no plans to move ever so regarding this as a £600 pa plus inflation commitment leads me to think that paying, say, £30k one-off to extinguish this annual commitment is a good deal for me regardless of the value it may put on my house.
What would make it much less attractive to me is if they do like they usually do and impose restrictive covenants. I would want to have the scope of erecting a treehouse and possibly a greenhouse which the covenants usually prohibit. Mainly I would use it as a wildflower meadow and plant additional trees. it would be an environmental project for me. "Public funds for public goods" would, I think, imply public access, which would not be relevant in this case.
You say "Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years". Yes, it is an awkward parcel and is on a gradient so severe that I have to take it diagonally with my ride-on mower. It is of no use to a farmer or horse owner and could never be developed.
Regarding combining parcels of land, wouldn`t ot be better to keep them separate to give any prospective future buyer of our house the option of having a smaller garden or a really big one?
You can definitely used to get grants to plant trees regardless of public access. 1/3 acre might be a bit small though. There also used to be stewardship schemes although it isn't clear what these are going to be replaced with yet.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
Loam/Sandy soil. I was going to plant a copse of silver birch, a UK native which is excellent for wildlife and will reference others in the area. Wildflower meadow in a chunk of the rest. No interesting botany as far as I am aware. I`m open to suggestions, though must be UK native planting. Anything to help bees and moths and other insects gets a thumbs up from me.
People need to stop listening to metropolitan remoaners like this Brexit-voting fisherman. The deal absolutely secured for him more fish as proven by the reduction in the fish he can catch. Time he started listening to experts like Mark "whereyabeen" Francois and the Institute of Government as opposed to his biased special interest group "facts".
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
Boris clarifying Williamson's remarks. Everything under constant review. Areas of high restriction (Primary schools) published, covers much of South East.
981 deaths announced. Essex calls in the military for desperate help with the ill. Professor Whitty is seen working over Christmas in a ward to help with the extreme overstretch.
Meanwhile, Toby Young (the one who keeps calling Professor Whitty “Witless” for his strange insistence that there is, in fact, a problem) keeps penning pieces on how the NHS are doing fine, less stretched than in other years, and they’re just making it up when they say that there’s a problem from these false positives.
At what point do his readers finally conclude that he’s delusional or crooked?
His detractors only have to counter his figures with better ones on ICU occupancy to destroy his argument.
They haven;t. as far as I can see. All they have is bluster and anecdote.
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
No need to renegotiate something when you are outside it and if you think the same EU coastal states will give up their access to UK waters to help the SNP you are in fairy land
Your party betraqyed the fisherfolk.
Your party has done it twice now.
Your party has taken us Scots outside the EU after promising in 2014 that voting no to indy was the only way to stay in the EU.
You are blaming someone else for all of this. Divert, distract, fail to take responsibiliuty for your glorious Brexit and your glorious Union.
I wouldn't dream of accusing you of being in fairy land because it would be such an insult at your age.
And Scotland will vote to stay in the union when and if indyref2 happens
But you'll keep supporting the PM and party that are too cowardly to allow that to be tested. Well done on your courage and moral rigour.
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
No need to renegotiate something when you are outside it and if you think the same EU coastal states will give up their access to UK waters to help the SNP you are in fairy land
Your party betraqyed the fisherfolk.
Your party has done it twice now.
Your party has taken us Scots outside the EU after promising in 2014 that voting no to indy was the only way to stay in the EU.
You are blaming someone else for all of this. Divert, distract, fail to take responsibiliuty for your glorious Brexit and your glorious Union.
I wouldn't dream of accusing you of being in fairy land because it would be such an insult at your age.
And Scotland will vote to stay in the union when and if indyref2 happens
As with the angry fishermen will you be advising those of us voting in that referendum to ignore the evidence of our eyes and ears and instead read a report from a Tory think tank?
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
So: London, which is not the worst-hit area, is at over 125% of normal capacity and still climbing remorselessly. And are currently using many normally non-ICU beds for ICU.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
Quite - it is a standard observation of operational research that all non-trivial supply/provisioning systems break down *before* they reach 100%. Being able to sustain 95% (say) is quite unusual.
I remember explaining this, the background and research to a councillor who was *proud* that schools, locally had 99% occupancy of places. He thought this was wonderful. The teachers seemed less enthused.....
I'm happy enough with Labour voting for the Deal. Abstain was my personal preference but I trust that Starmer has the electoral politics of this better sussed than me. The SNP, however, different kettle. Their "material change of circs" for Sindy2 is Scotland being Brexited by Boris Johnson against its will. So they have to vote against Boris Johnson's Brexit. It was a tricky decision for Labour, I think, but not for them.
People need to stop listening to metropolitan remoaners like this Brexit-voting fisherman. The deal absolutely secured for him more fish as proven by the reduction in the fish he can catch. Time he started listening to experts like Mark "whereyabeen" Francois and the Institute of Government as opposed to his biased special interest group "facts".
And somehow it is all the fault of the SNP. Because they might hypothetically do something mysterious that might be shite if they become independent. Although as they have said many times the thing in question is shite. Because it can be seen to be shite. Because the Tories did it first, and have now done it again. . But the Tories won't let the SNP do this possibly shite thing anyway. But it's still the SNP to blame.
I may have a chance to buy 1/3rd acre of land behind by garden. I currently rent it from the landowner. How can a fair price be established? Would it be a multiple of the rent or is there a per acre guide for "garden land". There is no development potential and the land is on a slope and is no use to a farmer or as a horse paddock.
Alternatively, would the adjusted garden size - which would be increasing sixfold I guess - put value on my house? And if so would the current landowner argue for the extra value?
Finally, would there be a separate land ownership for the land in isolation with the land registry, or would the boundaries of my current plot be expanded to envelope the new land? Are there any stamp duty implications either way?
Any help much appreciated.
I disagree with most of the others on this except perhaps @TimT and @MarqueeMark.
It is a marketplace of one buyer and one seller, so considerations such as "fair market price" are peripheral at best. It is worth what you will buy it for and the Great Estate will sell it for, nothing else.
You need to put yourself in their head and do a cost benefit from their point of view.
I would punt that they have let it for a relative peppercorn because it saves them having to spend some time and £200-£500 a year + admin managing it.
I would say it may add value to your house, but perhaps only 1-3%, for the correct buyer. If your street is all samey then it is an advantage.
Planning: the content of the rental agreement is private, and therefore not a Relevant Planning Matter; they could claim it was an elephant for all it matters. Though long term proven usage as a garden may give you a right to do so by prescription if no one has attempted to enforce. You would need I think 10 years proven use. Perhaps buy it with "can't be sure it is garden" as your argument, then serve your proof on the Council later. Though the GE surely know their planning stuff.
Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years, whether the transaction is big enough to be worth the bother etc. They could use it eg as part of the compulsory 10% open space in a medium sized estate to allow more houses on the flat bit, or as a quid pro quo to make another development acceptable (which was what Sarah Beeny did).
Don't forget that in a couple of years they may be able to gain an income from "public funds for public goods" by turning it into a wildlife meadow or a copse.
I would say that anything under 20k will not be worth the hassle for them, so perhaps start with 20k + an overage clause, and willing to go to double or treble that, and paying costs. Expect maybe 2k to 5k costs if you have a custom agreement. You could even offer a preemptive right ro repurchase at double plus land inflation.
Can you get some neighbours to make parallel offers, to make it a bigger deal?
On the parcel, you either have the buggeration of combining now, or of combining them when you sell. I would do it now, as time is of the essence when selling.
There is a sweet spot for you in that Stamp Duty does not apply (I think) on transactions under 40k.
Gosh @MattW that`s a great post - I don`t know where to start. (And @Gallowgate for your continued interest.)
A few things:
You ask "Can you get an area TPO on the whole thing before you conversation, such that it will make it a little less attractive as potential development?" My garden is in a conservation area. The land in question is just the other side of the conservation area boundary. There are fruit trees and a few conifers on the land. I don`t think a TPO is relevant.
The current rent that I pay to the Estate is £600 pa and this tends to rise with inflation. So not a peppercorn. Basically, I`ve been paying for the privilege of cutting the grass and the boundary hedges!
DavidL suggested 5 x this and I said that, knowing the Estate, they would not accept less than 25x. Your comments of £20k plus (plus costs) makes sense to me (getting into their head, as you say). The way I look at it is that I am committed to £600 plus inflation each year. I know I`m not really committed - but I am in reality because the land connects to my garden and I feel that it is essential to protect my outlook. (The land does not connect to anyone else`s garden.) Put simply, I wouldn`t want anyone else to rent it or own it. We have no plans to move ever so regarding this as a £600 pa plus inflation commitment leads me to think that paying, say, £30k one-off to extinguish this annual commitment is a good deal for me regardless of the value it may put on my house.
What would make it much less attractive to me is if they do like they usually do and impose restrictive covenants. I would want to have the scope of erecting a treehouse and possibly a greenhouse which the covenants usually prohibit. Mainly I would use it as a wildflower meadow and plant additional trees. it would be an environmental project for me. "Public funds for public goods" would, I think, imply public access, which would not be relevant in this case.
You say "Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years". Yes, it is an awkward parcel and is on a gradient so severe that I have to take it diagonally with my ride-on mower. It is of no use to a farmer or horse owner and could never be developed.
Regarding combining parcels of land, wouldn`t ot be better to keep them separate to give any prospective future buyer of our house the option of having a smaller garden or a really big one?
You can definitely used to get grants to plant trees regardless of public access. 1/3 acre might be a bit small though. There also used to be stewardship schemes although it isn't clear what these are going to be replaced with yet.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
Loam/Sandy soil. I was going to plant a copse of silver birch, a UK native which is excellent for wildlife and will reference others in the area. Wildflower meadow in a chunk of the rest. No interesting botany as far as I am aware. I`m open to suggestions, though must be UK native planting. Anything to help bees and moths and other insects gets a thumbs up from me.
I misread that, and was wondering whose corpse you were planning to plant.
For the first time ever, I thought I'd listen to a Boris Johnson briefing.
Good Lord.
Desperate - bordering on incoherent, I know some think of him as some great communicator but he was mumbling and bumbling through his sentences. I presume he's had no time to read what he was saying or even rehearse it.
It was embarrassing and confusing. Even the perfunctory exhortations sounded half-hearted. It was all about lights and tunnels, God help us, and a valedictory "triumph for British engineering" - who cares, it's not about having 20 working vaccines and where they come from - it's about getting all of them some of them or one of them to the population (or getting the population to them).
I'm happy enough with Labour voting for the Deal. Abstain was my personal preference but I trust that Starmer has the electoral politics of this better sussed than me. The SNP, however, different kettle. Their "material change of circs" for Sindy2 is Scotland being Brexited by Boris Johnson against its will. So they have to vote against Boris Johnson's Brexit. It was a tricky decision for Labour, I think, but not for them.
Interesting however that SLAB agreed with the SNP and not their actual lord and master in London. Whatever next, a truly independent labour party in Scotland?
"Germany recorded more than 1,000 coronavirus-related deaths in one day for the first time on Wednesday, days after it started vaccinating people and as an extension of a lockdown looms.
The number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the country rose by 22,459 to 1,687,185, data from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) for infectious diseases showed.
The reported death toll increased by 1,129 to 32,107."
Damn that is bad. It was countries like Germany that gave us hope there was a right way to do this.
Do people think this is primarily because they have been caught out by the new, more infectious, virus strain or have they slipped up somewhere from their previous tight controls?
They tried a diet lockdown approach and it failed.
We are seeing the same thing across Europe. Magnified, yesterday and today by Weekend Effect.
Either everyone is making the same mistake at the same time, in the same way. Or something has changed.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
So: London, which is not the worst-hit area, is at over 125% of normal capacity and still climbing remorselessly. And are currently using many normally non-ICU beds for ICU.
Yes. Bear in mind that London has both a younger population, and more ICU capacity per capita than other areas, due to numerous tertiary hospitals with specialist services.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
So: London, which is not the worst-hit area, is at over 125% of normal capacity and still climbing remorselessly. And are currently using many normally non-ICU beds for ICU.
And not getting to heart attacks and strokes in time. The system is teetering on the very edge, I believe, with staffing a massive problem.
I may have a chance to buy 1/3rd acre of land behind by garden. I currently rent it from the landowner. How can a fair price be established? Would it be a multiple of the rent or is there a per acre guide for "garden land". There is no development potential and the land is on a slope and is no use to a farmer or as a horse paddock.
Alternatively, would the adjusted garden size - which would be increasing sixfold I guess - put value on my house? And if so would the current landowner argue for the extra value?
Finally, would there be a separate land ownership for the land in isolation with the land registry, or would the boundaries of my current plot be expanded to envelope the new land? Are there any stamp duty implications either way?
Any help much appreciated.
I disagree with most of the others on this except perhaps @TimT and @MarqueeMark.
It is a marketplace of one buyer and one seller, so considerations such as "fair market price" are peripheral at best. It is worth what you will buy it for and the Great Estate will sell it for, nothing else.
You need to put yourself in their head and do a cost benefit from their point of view.
I would punt that they have let it for a relative peppercorn because it saves them having to spend some time and £200-£500 a year + admin managing it.
I would say it may add value to your house, but perhaps only 1-3%, for the correct buyer. If your street is all samey then it is an advantage.
Planning: the content of the rental agreement is private, and therefore not a Relevant Planning Matter; they could claim it was an elephant for all it matters. Though long term proven usage as a garden may give you a right to do so by prescription if no one has attempted to enforce. You would need I think 10 years proven use. Perhaps buy it with "can't be sure it is garden" as your argument, then serve your proof on the Council later. Though the GE surely know their planning stuff.
Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years, whether the transaction is big enough to be worth the bother etc. They could use it eg as part of the compulsory 10% open space in a medium sized estate to allow more houses on the flat bit, or as a quid pro quo to make another development acceptable (which was what Sarah Beeny did).
Don't forget that in a couple of years they may be able to gain an income from "public funds for public goods" by turning it into a wildlife meadow or a copse.
I would say that anything under 20k will not be worth the hassle for them, so perhaps start with 20k + an overage clause, and willing to go to double or treble that, and paying costs. Expect maybe 2k to 5k costs if you have a custom agreement. You could even offer a preemptive right ro repurchase at double plus land inflation.
Can you get some neighbours to make parallel offers, to make it a bigger deal?
On the parcel, you either have the buggeration of combining now, or of combining them when you sell. I would do it now, as time is of the essence when selling.
There is a sweet spot for you in that Stamp Duty does not apply (I think) on transactions under 40k.
Gosh @MattW that`s a great post - I don`t know where to start. (And @Gallowgate for your continued interest.)
A few things:
You ask "Can you get an area TPO on the whole thing before you conversation, such that it will make it a little less attractive as potential development?" My garden is in a conservation area. The land in question is just the other side of the conservation area boundary. There are fruit trees and a few conifers on the land. I don`t think a TPO is relevant.
The current rent that I pay to the Estate is £600 pa and this tends to rise with inflation. So not a peppercorn. Basically, I`ve been paying for the privilege of cutting the grass and the boundary hedges!
DavidL suggested 5 x this and I said that, knowing the Estate, they would not accept less than 25x. Your comments of £20k plus (plus costs) makes sense to me (getting into their head, as you say). The way I look at it is that I am committed to £600 plus inflation each year. I know I`m not really committed - but I am in reality because the land connects to my garden and I feel that it is essential to protect my outlook. (The land does not connect to anyone else`s garden.) Put simply, I wouldn`t want anyone else to rent it or own it. We have no plans to move ever so regarding this as a £600 pa plus inflation commitment leads me to think that paying, say, £30k one-off to extinguish this annual commitment is a good deal for me regardless of the value it may put on my house.
What would make it much less attractive to me is if they do like they usually do and impose restrictive covenants. I would want to have the scope of erecting a treehouse and possibly a greenhouse which the covenants usually prohibit. Mainly I would use it as a wildflower meadow and plant additional trees. it would be an environmental project for me. "Public funds for public goods" would, I think, imply public access, which would not be relevant in this case.
You say "Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years". Yes, it is an awkward parcel and is on a gradient so severe that I have to take it diagonally with my ride-on mower. It is of no use to a farmer or horse owner and could never be developed.
Regarding combining parcels of land, wouldn`t ot be better to keep them separate to give any prospective future buyer of our house the option of having a smaller garden or a really big one?
You can definitely used to get grants to plant trees regardless of public access. 1/3 acre might be a bit small though. There also used to be stewardship schemes although it isn't clear what these are going to be replaced with yet.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
Loam/Sandy soil. I was going to plant a copse of silver birch, a UK native which is excellent for wildlife and will reference others in the area. Wildflower meadow in a chunk of the rest. No interesting botany as far as I am aware. I`m open to suggestions, though must be UK native planting. Anything to help bees and moths and other insects gets a thumbs up from me.
I misread that, and was wondering whose corpse you were planning to plant.
Might be worth looking at the Bumblebee Conservation Trust website for ideas. Ditto Woodland Trust. Of course, you may already have done so.
According to Norway the UK has a better deal than their EEA one and are seeking to open negotiations with the the EU to improve their arrangements in line with the UK- EU deal
Isn't it the Euoskeptic Center Party that's flying that kite? In other news I fear I have to enlighten you regarding Farage and his attitude to the EU.
We haven't heard any updates from you on the attitude of your fishing relatives from NE Scotland for a while. It would be great to get an on-the-ground report on reactions to BJ's great deal.
Why are you upset that Norway may be concerned the UK has a good deal
As for Farage I have comprehensively condemned him in my posts over years
It is a far better deal than the SNP plunging them back into the CFP and not to mention the 100 million support from HMG
You really, really do need to read up on SNP policy - which has always been unhappy with the CFP and sought to renegotiate it.
No need to renegotiate something when you are outside it and if you think the same EU coastal states will give up their access to UK waters to help the SNP you are in fairy land
Your party betraqyed the fisherfolk.
Your party has done it twice now.
Your party has taken us Scots outside the EU after promising in 2014 that voting no to indy was the only way to stay in the EU.
You are blaming someone else for all of this. Divert, distract, fail to take responsibiliuty for your glorious Brexit and your glorious Union.
I wouldn't dream of accusing you of being in fairy land because it would be such an insult at your age.
And Scotland will vote to stay in the union when and if indyref2 happens
As with the angry fishermen will you be advising those of us voting in that referendum to ignore the evidence of our eyes and ears and instead read a report from a Tory think tank?
The fishermen will not vote to go back to the EU and hand back fishing to Brussels and the CFP
I took my neighbour to have her vaccination in Milton Keynes hospital this morning. It was an uplifting experience, with plenty of volunteers to assist us. We had a returnee retired nurse ( doing it 'to get us back to normal') and a recently retired returnee GP. It was friendly, efficient but running at well under capacity.
I would guess it could have had at least 3 times the number if patients and still had room in the car park, waiting room etc (albeit with the odd queue but we didn't queue atall at 9.15 and were quite prepared too).
We could quickly expand the programme to deliver far more vaccinations ( by some considerable margin) if our experience this morning is anything to go by.
I'm prone to sentimentality but it made me proud to be British. Young NHS workers, of every race, working alongside retired NHS staff and volunteers to deliver a service that was not just efficient but which was friendly, caring and utterly reassuring that we will beat this.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
So: London, which is not the worst-hit area, is at over 125% of normal capacity and still climbing remorselessly. And are currently using many normally non-ICU beds for ICU.
And not getting to heart attacks and strokes in time. The system is teetering on the very edge, I believe, with staffing a massive problem.
And cutting other services to the bone, ICU is very staff heavy.
I took my neighbour to have her vaccination in Milton Keynes hospital this morning. It was an uplifting experience, with plenty of volunteers to assist us. We had a returnee retired nurse ( doing it 'to get us back to normal') and a recently retired returnee GP. It was friendly, efficient but running at well under capacity.
I would guess it could have had at least 3 times the number if patients and still had room in the car park, waiting room etc (albeit with the odd queue but we didn't queue atall at 9.15 and were quite prepared too).
We could quickly expand the programme to deliver far more vaccinations ( by some considerable margin) if our experience this morning is anything to go by.
I'm prone to sentimentality but it made me proud to be British. Young NHS workers, of every race, working alongside retired NHS staff and volunteers to deliver a service that was not just efficient but which was friendly, caring and utterly reassuring that we will beat this.
Glad to hear you've had your shot. Sounds like a really positive experience.
Hoping my elderly mum and uncle will be in the next wave.
I'm happy enough with Labour voting for the Deal. Abstain was my personal preference but I trust that Starmer has the electoral politics of this better sussed than me. The SNP, however, different kettle. Their "material change of circs" for Sindy2 is Scotland being Brexited by Boris Johnson against its will. So they have to vote against Boris Johnson's Brexit. It was a tricky decision for Labour, I think, but not for them.
That speech quite clearly stands Scottish Labour against independence and with the conservatives and lib dems also opposed the SNP will face a challenge but more than that the economics will see independence fall
JVT "only 2 hospitalisations after vaccination in entire Oxford clinical trial - one two days after jab, second after 10 days - so likely infection in both cases happened before vaccination.
Also strongly in favour of amended second jab time frame "Maximum benefit for most people in shortest possible time - strongly endorsed by all 4 CMOs"
Am I right in thinking the line on inoculations is now to give as many people as possible the first injection from whatever vaccine they have because the efficacy of the first injection alone is sufficient and perhaps only offer a second injection to the especially vulnerable?
An interesting move if correct and it'll be a test to see if the claims of those producing the vaccine are true. It may not have an immediate impact on case numbers but hopefully it will reduce the numbers of deaths and those requiring hospital treatment.
JVT "only 2 hospitalisations after vaccination in entire Oxford clinical trial - one two days after jab, second after 10 days - so likely infection in both cases happened before vaccination.
Also strongly in favour of amended second jab time frame "Maximum benefit for most people in shortest possible time - strongly endorsed by all 4 CMOs"
I remember when JVT mocked people who suggested we start wearing masks.
I'm happy enough with Labour voting for the Deal. Abstain was my personal preference but I trust that Starmer has the electoral politics of this better sussed than me. The SNP, however, different kettle. Their "material change of circs" for Sindy2 is Scotland being Brexited by Boris Johnson against its will. So they have to vote against Boris Johnson's Brexit. It was a tricky decision for Labour, I think, but not for them.
That speech quite clearly stands Scottish Labour against independence and with the conservatives and lib dems also opposed the SNP will face a challenge but more than that the economics will see independence fall
We will see. 1st thing Holyrood elections. Then if result as expected, big big decision for Johnson. I'm looking forward to it from the betting and punditry perspective.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
Nobody ever accused anybody of sitting around drinking coffee, for the record.
I can see how in this pandemic winter hospitals would want a bigger margin for error than in ordinary flu years, and would want also want more ICU 'surge' capacity than in previous years.
A random snapshot of English hospitals at 82% ICU capacity now versus (say) 85% capacity in previous years doesn't necessarily tell the whole story, therefore
That said, such numbers do suggest some of what we hear from government, health service and media is hysteria. Things are mostly well in hand.
Boris clarifying Williamson's remarks. Everything under constant review. Areas of high restriction (Primary schools) published, covers much of South East.
Much of SE? Gav implied it would just be the odd one here and there?
I may have a chance to buy 1/3rd acre of land behind by garden. I currently rent it from the landowner. How can a fair price be established? Would it be a multiple of the rent or is there a per acre guide for "garden land". There is no development potential and the land is on a slope and is no use to a farmer or as a horse paddock.
Alternatively, would the adjusted garden size - which would be increasing sixfold I guess - put value on my house? And if so would the current landowner argue for the extra value?
Finally, would there be a separate land ownership for the land in isolation with the land registry, or would the boundaries of my current plot be expanded to envelope the new land? Are there any stamp duty implications either way?
Any help much appreciated.
I disagree with most of the others on this except perhaps @TimT and @MarqueeMark.
It is a marketplace of one buyer and one seller, so considerations such as "fair market price" are peripheral at best. It is worth what you will buy it for and the Great Estate will sell it for, nothing else.
You need to put yourself in their head and do a cost benefit from their point of view.
I would punt that they have let it for a relative peppercorn because it saves them having to spend some time and £200-£500 a year + admin managing it.
I would say it may add value to your house, but perhaps only 1-3%, for the correct buyer. If your street is all samey then it is an advantage.
Planning: the content of the rental agreement is private, and therefore not a Relevant Planning Matter; they could claim it was an elephant for all it matters. Though long term proven usage as a garden may give you a right to do so by prescription if no one has attempted to enforce. You would need I think 10 years proven use. Perhaps buy it with "can't be sure it is garden" as your argument, then serve your proof on the Council later. Though the GE surely know their planning stuff.
Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years, whether the transaction is big enough to be worth the bother etc. They could use it eg as part of the compulsory 10% open space in a medium sized estate to allow more houses on the flat bit, or as a quid pro quo to make another development acceptable (which was what Sarah Beeny did).
Don't forget that in a couple of years they may be able to gain an income from "public funds for public goods" by turning it into a wildlife meadow or a copse.
I would say that anything under 20k will not be worth the hassle for them, so perhaps start with 20k + an overage clause, and willing to go to double or treble that, and paying costs. Expect maybe 2k to 5k costs if you have a custom agreement. You could even offer a preemptive right ro repurchase at double plus land inflation.
Can you get some neighbours to make parallel offers, to make it a bigger deal?
On the parcel, you either have the buggeration of combining now, or of combining them when you sell. I would do it now, as time is of the essence when selling.
There is a sweet spot for you in that Stamp Duty does not apply (I think) on transactions under 40k.
Gosh @MattW that`s a great post - I don`t know where to start. (And @Gallowgate for your continued interest.)
A few things:
You ask "Can you get an area TPO on the whole thing before you conversation, such that it will make it a little less attractive as potential development?" My garden is in a conservation area. The land in question is just the other side of the conservation area boundary. There are fruit trees and a few conifers on the land. I don`t think a TPO is relevant.
The current rent that I pay to the Estate is £600 pa and this tends to rise with inflation. So not a peppercorn. Basically, I`ve been paying for the privilege of cutting the grass and the boundary hedges!
DavidL suggested 5 x this and I said that, knowing the Estate, they would not accept less than 25x. Your comments of £20k plus (plus costs) makes sense to me (getting into their head, as you say). The way I look at it is that I am committed to £600 plus inflation each year. I know I`m not really committed - but I am in reality because the land connects to my garden and I feel that it is essential to protect my outlook. (The land does not connect to anyone else`s garden.) Put simply, I wouldn`t want anyone else to rent it or own it. We have no plans to move ever so regarding this as a £600 pa plus inflation commitment leads me to think that paying, say, £30k one-off to extinguish this annual commitment is a good deal for me regardless of the value it may put on my house.
What would make it much less attractive to me is if they do like they usually do and impose restrictive covenants. I would want to have the scope of erecting a treehouse and possibly a greenhouse which the covenants usually prohibit. Mainly I would use it as a wildflower meadow and plant additional trees. it would be an environmental project for me. "Public funds for public goods" would, I think, imply public access, which would not be relevant in this case.
You say "Stuff that matters is whether it is a small awkward parcel that makes one of their fields square, whether they think *they* can develop it in the next hundred years". Yes, it is an awkward parcel and is on a gradient so severe that I have to take it diagonally with my ride-on mower. It is of no use to a farmer or horse owner and could never be developed.
Regarding combining parcels of land, wouldn`t ot be better to keep them separate to give any prospective future buyer of our house the option of having a smaller garden or a really big one?
You can definitely used to get grants to plant trees regardless of public access. 1/3 acre might be a bit small though. There also used to be stewardship schemes although it isn't clear what these are going to be replaced with yet.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
Loam/Sandy soil. I was going to plant a copse of silver birch, a UK native which is excellent for wildlife and will reference others in the area. Wildflower meadow in a chunk of the rest. No interesting botany as far as I am aware. I`m open to suggestions, though must be UK native planting. Anything to help bees and moths and other insects gets a thumbs up from me.
I misread that, and was wondering whose corpse you were planning to plant.
Might be worth looking at the Bumblebee Conservation Trust website for ideas. Ditto Woodland Trust. Of course, you may already have done so.
In the full,knowledge I will regret asking this:
Why do you want to turn the Bumblebee Conservation Trust and Woodland Trust into corpses and bury them?
Am I right in thinking the line on inoculations is now to give as many people as possible the first injection from whatever vaccine they have because the efficacy of the first injection alone is sufficient and perhaps only offer a second injection to the especially vulnerable?
No. Everyone should get Jab 2 - it provides greater longer term protection.
Just they won't get it within 3/4 weeks of the first, but within 12 weeks.
JVT "only 2 hospitalisations after vaccination in entire Oxford clinical trial - one two days after jab, second after 10 days - so likely infection in both cases happened before vaccination.
Also strongly in favour of amended second jab time frame "Maximum benefit for most people in shortest possible time - strongly endorsed by all 4 CMOs"
I remember when JVT mocked people who suggested we start wearing masks.
Where ever that Tier 3 in a sea of Tier 4 in the Midlands, I bet they are really going to appreciate loads of rule breakers popping in to use the shops etc.
Where ever that Tier 3 in a sea of Tier 4 in the Midlands, I bet they are really going to appreciate loads of rule breakers popping in to use the shops etc.
Williamson has actually managed to make it worse, which is quite something.
Nothing on the DfE website about schools in areas of high restriction.
Bloody idiot.
It’s blatantly obvious the government has no regard whatsoever for the health and safety of teachers.
Or to be honest of parents with kids at school. Even if they are testing every kid every week there is still a route for rapid infection from one family to another (or to many others). Given how infectious this new strain is supposed to be I am deeply unhappy about sending my son back to school.
For me personally it helps that he thrived in the first lockdown and even the teachers noticed a massive improvement in his work after he went back. So I have no fears for his education suffering. Of course that informs my views a great deal and I understand it doesn't necessarily apply to everyone.
JVT "only 2 hospitalisations after vaccination in entire Oxford clinical trial - one two days after jab, second after 10 days - so likely infection in both cases happened before vaccination.
Also strongly in favour of amended second jab time frame "Maximum benefit for most people in shortest possible time - strongly endorsed by all 4 CMOs"
Yes, but there was a very low infection rate generally over the summertime, which was the gap period in the Oxford trial. How true those figures are when much higher rates apply, we don't know yet.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
Nobody ever accused anybody of sitting around drinking coffee, for the record.
I can see how in this pandemic winter hospitals would want a bigger margin for error than in ordinary flu years, and would want also want more ICU 'surge' capacity than in previous years.
A random snapshot of English hospitals at 82% ICU capacity now versus (say) 85% capacity in previous years doesn't necessarily tell the whole story, therefore
That said, such numbers do suggest some of what we hear from government, health service and media is hysteria. Things are mostly well in hand.
Haven't you got to think about staffing capacity rather than beds? The number of beds is (relatively) easy to increase (see Nightingales); the number of staff nigh on impossible to increase in the short term.
In defence of Toby Young (not someone I know, or read anything by, or have any particular desire to defend), I was a bit puzzled by the furore over his 'faked' picture of an empty ICU ward I saw on here yesterday. I thought it was a pretty automatic assumption that he'd used a stock image of an empty ICU ward to illustrate his blog (PB style), as opposed to him actually claiming he'd gone undercover in the NHS and the image was some sort of scoop.
Of course there are empty ICU beds. That is because of surge planning, such as the use of operating theatres and staff as ICU. It doesn't mean that they were sitting idle drinking coffee. See this thread.
Nobody ever accused anybody of sitting around drinking coffee, for the record.
I can see how in this pandemic winter hospitals would want a bigger margin for error than in ordinary flu years, and would want also want more ICU 'surge' capacity than in previous years.
A random snapshot of English hospitals at 82% ICU capacity now versus (say) 85% capacity in previous years doesn't necessarily tell the whole story, therefore
That said, such numbers do suggest some of what we hear from government, health service and media is hysteria. Things are mostly well in hand.
No, they are not.
The increase in effective capacity has come at the cost of
- shutting down shut about everything apart from COVID treatment - calling in all staff who are not actually dead. - using every trick in the book they learnt in March about how to extend medical services
And they are still about to run out of effective space.
Boris clarifying Williamson's remarks. Everything under constant review. Areas of high restriction (Primary schools) published, covers much of South East.
Much of SE? Gav implied it would just be the odd one here and there?
A number of LAs in London, Essex, Herts, Kent.
Interestingly, not Greenwich, who Gavlar was all ready to sue 10 days ago.
Comments
Do people think this is primarily because they have been caught out by the new, more infectious, virus strain or have they slipped up somewhere from their previous tight controls?
Its also worth noting that the graphic shows ICU usage was below average even during some periods of quite heavy restrictions. (EG May).
Nothing on the DfE website about schools in areas of high restriction.
Bloody idiot.
Yesterday
Your party has done it twice now.
Your party has taken us Scots outside the EU after promising in 2014 that voting no to indy was the only way to stay in the EU.
You are blaming someone else for all of this. Divert, distract, fail to take responsibiliuty for your glorious Brexit and your glorious Union.
I wouldn't dream of accusing you of being in fairy land because it would be such an insult at your age.
The people who thought that the second wave was all due to testing errors are the same people who seem to think that hospitals and intensive care units in much of the country are not at capacity.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1343976365536796673
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1344280898112544771
The scariest bit is when you compare the non-covid blue colours to the last five years (which always cluster closely) and reflect on the scale of other hospital activity that’s been crowded out by the rising covid tide.
(Does Young suggest who should man extra beds? I believe training up doctors and ICU-trained nurses is a long process, and the staffing issue is exacerbated by staff getting covid or having to isolate.)
No difference considering my university has been pretty much all online since September.
I believe he's been marked that way before.
What is the soil type? Is there any interesting botany? Planting trees isn't always the best thing to do.
One last time.
Financial support.
Target end date.
So unnecessary though. All he had to do was say, ‘go back on the original date in the week beginning 4th January.’ But he couldn’t even do that.
I suppose it’s some achievement to be more useless than Chris Grayling, but even so...
https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1344001092900823040?s=19
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1344328747273617410
And are currently using many normally non-ICU beds for ICU.
I remember explaining this, the background and research to a councillor who was *proud* that schools, locally had 99% occupancy of places. He thought this was wonderful. The teachers seemed less enthused.....
https://twitter.com/JohndickensSW/status/1344329366344519680?s=19
For the first time ever, I thought I'd listen to a Boris Johnson briefing.
Good Lord.
Desperate - bordering on incoherent, I know some think of him as some great communicator but he was mumbling and bumbling through his sentences. I presume he's had no time to read what he was saying or even rehearse it.
It was embarrassing and confusing. Even the perfunctory exhortations sounded half-hearted. It was all about lights and tunnels, God help us, and a valedictory "triumph for British engineering" - who cares, it's not about having 20 working vaccines and where they come from - it's about getting all of them some of them or one of them to the population (or getting the population to them).
981 deaths - horrible.
Either everyone is making the same mistake at the same time, in the same way. Or something has changed.
Today
Yesterday
I would guess it could have had at least 3 times the number if patients and still had room in the car park, waiting room etc (albeit with the odd queue but we didn't queue atall at 9.15 and were quite prepared too).
We could quickly expand the programme to deliver far more vaccinations ( by some considerable margin) if our experience this morning is anything to go by.
I'm prone to sentimentality but it made me proud to be British. Young NHS workers, of every race, working alongside retired NHS staff and volunteers to deliver a service that was not just efficient but which was friendly, caring and utterly reassuring that we will beat this.
https://twitter.com/DrSimonAshworth/status/1344107700540600320?s=19
Hoping my elderly mum and uncle will be in the next wave.
Whose idea was that?
Also strongly in favour of amended second jab time frame "Maximum benefit for most people in shortest possible time - strongly endorsed by all 4 CMOs"
Batten down the hatches. Sniff the air in March.
An interesting move if correct and it'll be a test to see if the claims of those producing the vaccine are true. It may not have an immediate impact on case numbers but hopefully it will reduce the numbers of deaths and those requiring hospital treatment.
Boris, you idiot.
I can see how in this pandemic winter hospitals would want a bigger margin for error than in ordinary flu years, and would want also want more ICU 'surge' capacity than in previous years.
A random snapshot of English hospitals at 82% ICU capacity now versus (say) 85% capacity in previous years doesn't necessarily tell the whole story, therefore
That said, such numbers do suggest some of what we hear from government, health service and media is hysteria. Things are mostly well in hand.
Why do you want to turn the Bumblebee Conservation Trust and Woodland Trust into corpses and bury them?
Just they won't get it within 3/4 weeks of the first, but within 12 weeks.
My local MP has woken up - Karen Buck. A very poor MP, and she actually looks like she has just woken up.
Sam Coates managing to squeeze in at least 5 questions from my count...
For me personally it helps that he thrived in the first lockdown and even the teachers noticed a massive improvement in his work after he went back. So I have no fears for his education suffering. Of course that informs my views a great deal and I understand it doesn't necessarily apply to everyone.
Spare beds which cannot be staffed = crisis.
The increase in effective capacity has come at the cost of
- shutting down shut about everything apart from COVID treatment
- calling in all staff who are not actually dead.
- using every trick in the book they learnt in March about how to extend medical services
And they are still about to run out of effective space.
Interestingly, not Greenwich, who Gavlar was all ready to sue 10 days ago.