The Oxford/AZ vaccine gets approved – now ministers needs to ensure that it gets out quickly and in

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/DharshiniDavid/status/1344309630198013956

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.

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/DharshiniDavid/status/1344309630198013956

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.

Andy_Cooke said:

contrarian said:

Andy_Cooke said:

So:

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):



Source: ICNARC here https://www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports

FrankBooth said:

I fear Israel rolling out the vaccine quickly will have certain people thinking.........

londonpubman said:

kinabalu said:

londonpubman said:

Useless by Williamson. We need to keep the schools closed until end Jan at the earliest. Certainly the secondary schools.

That's the next iteration, I think. Not too long off.

Announced next week when the daily case numbers go past 70,000!

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

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.

MaxPB said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

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

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9099049/Questions-Britains-decision-drop-two-dose-vaccine-regimen.html

FFS.

This government really has screwed the pooch.

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.

contrarian said:

Andy_Cooke said:

contrarian said:

Andy_Cooke said:

So:

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):



Source: ICNARC here https://www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports

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).

Richard_Tyndall said:

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

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.

Has anything been said about universities given how badly they spread the virus last term?

kinabalu said:

Mark of the man -
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1344280898112544771

kinabalu said:

SouthamObserver said:

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.

londonpubman said:

kinabalu said:

londonpubman said:

Useless by Williamson. We need to keep the schools closed until end Jan at the earliest. Certainly the secondary schools.

That's the next iteration, I think. Not too long off.

Announced next week when the daily case numbers go past 70,000!

Richard_Tyndall said:

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

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.

Has anything been said about universities given how badly they spread the virus last term?

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/DharshiniDavid/status/1344309630198013956

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.

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

SouthamObserver said:

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.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BenPhilip_/status/1344324401957888004

contrarian said:

Andy_Cooke said:

So:

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.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/DharshiniDavid/status/1344309630198013956

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

Foxy said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

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.

https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1344001092900823040?s=19

Big_G_NorthWales said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/gorbalsgoebbels/status/1344320181275914240?s=20

That is very good

RochdalePioneers said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BenPhilip_/status/1344324401957888004

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".

Stocky said:

Flatlander said:

Stocky said:

MattW said:

Stocky said:

A cheeky question for the lawyers out there.

@Gallowgate ?

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.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Andy_JS said:

"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."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/dec/30/coronavirus-live-news-uk-approves-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-updates

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.

ydoethur said:

Stocky said:

Flatlander said:

Stocky said:

MattW said:

Stocky said:

A cheeky question for the lawyers out there.

@Gallowgate ?

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.

kinabalu said:

Andy_Cooke said:

Foxy said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

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.

https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1344001092900823040?s=19

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.

williamglenn said:

Very grim press conference. "The NHS has still not seen the impact of infections that will have occurred due to mixing at Christmas."

williamglenn said:

Very grim press conference. "The NHS has still not seen the impact of infections that will have occurred due to mixing at Christmas."

CarlottaVance said:

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"

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/gorbalsgoebbels/status/1344320181275914240?s=20

That is very good

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

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

Boris clarifying Williamson's remarks. Everything under constant review. Areas of high restriction (Primary schools) published, covers much of South East.

Carnyx said:

ydoethur said:

Stocky said:

Flatlander said:

Stocky said:

MattW said:

Stocky said:

A cheeky question for the lawyers out there.

@Gallowgate ?

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.

stodge said:

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?

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

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.

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

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.

Nigelb said:

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

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.

FrancisUrquhart said:

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.

CarlottaVance said:

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"

contrarian said:

Foxy said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

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.

https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1344001092900823040?s=19

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.

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Is it me or is Boris Johnson turning into the Hunchback of Notre Dame in this picture?

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1344328747273617410

By the look of it it is a strange optical illusion

No, that’s actually our PM.