As someone fairly close to the coal face on this thread, there's a LOT going on to get first time buyers in to new homes. First of all wherever I drive around our local towns and villages, there are housing estates galore going up, Tring, Aylesbury, Leighton Buzzard and thousands on the new M1 junction behind Houghton Regis for example.
Then there's the LISA and HTB ISA, the rebirth of 95% LTV mortgages (and lots of 90%) plus new initiatives like Nationwide's Helping Hand criteria just launched where income multiples of circa 5.5x are now possible for long term fixes for FTBs. I've client's children who've not been able to get on the ladder due to affordability constraints but having mustered a bit of a deposit but who now can with these things happening. It's very exciting for them (and for me!) to have good news now.
Only a small snippet but that's my perspective.
So much life wished away to buy a new build clone. This obsession with getting on the market no matter the cost will stagnate the young. You can't have a dynamic economy if your peoples lives are dedicated to propping up Taylor Wimpey's balance sheet. 5.5x multiples, fucking madness. What next signing up your unborn for another 25 years of servitude to Barratt. The fuckers in government have already been floating the use of what limited DC pensions we have to prop up the sick economy we will inherit.
If Barratt and Taylor Wimpey didn't exist we'd be looking at 10x multiples not 5.5x ones.
Really good trolling. The house builders have helped keep prices down, fucking brilliant. Coming up next Persimmon have a vested interest in building affordable housing.
let 10x multiples happen, make housing truly unaffordable to the majority. We'll just be skipping another 15 years of conservative policy to end up with it anyway. And maybe a few suckers will have avoided the ponzi scheme.
Its time investing in productive assets was made government policy. We could all fund a chip industry at least it will fucking make something and we will be less beholden to the house builders.
No trolling. Absolutely 100% yes the house builders have helped keep prices down, and absolutely 100% yes Persimmon do have a vested interest in building affordable housing. If their homes are unaffordable, they won't get sold, they won't make a profit.
The sole issue is that population has risen much faster than housing - and that the amount of land dripped out to be able to be built in is in many areas insufficient to keep up with population demands. That's not the house builders fault.
If any and all land could be built on, outside of very tightly defined protected areas, then we could have much greater housing capacity, more houses built and more affordable ones too. Trying to constrain land supply is the issue.
Assuming we are entirely supply constrained the house builders will benefit no? They can set the prices at the very limit to which the market is able to support. See the 3-4 bedroom 'executive clones' popping up all over Yorkshire.
Do you not accept that the largest home builders have the UK over a barrel. Yes they will build and drip feed homes into an area. But if you earn anything near an average income your gonna have to tale the most leverage you can afford and whatever inducement the government is offering at the time.
No of course I don't accept that, don't be silly.
Land is drip fed by the Councils, not the builders. If the Councils released huge swathes of land to be built on then if the large home builders didn't build on it then new companies could easily be created that would do so. But they can't, because the land hasn't got permission.
From the LGA: House builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build.
The LGA is working on an online map showing where these are. The full report is balanced and examines a variety of relevant issues:
"Planning is not a barrier to building. Councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications and in 2017 they worked with developers to grant planning permission to over 350,000 homes, an 11-year high. In fact house builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build. This is a positive base reflecting improving economic conditions following the recession"
"Councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications" is another one of those ridiculous meaningless statements to distract. People don't put in applications they know will be refused.
By only allowing a small amount of land to be built on, the applications go in for that land - but all the other land that could have been built on if permission weren't denied never gets applications in the first place!
I think you're ignoring
'house builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build'
Seems like they're doing well enough at the planning stage but suffering when it come to throwing down the concrete.
No I'm not because its completely meaningless gibberish. It takes time to get things built, you can't just snap your fingers and have it done overnight. There will always be a pipeline of houses due to be built. That includes houses where developers have received permission for an entire project but it will take years to build all of them, in phases, even though construction has already begun. It also includes houses where permission has been granted in principle, but construction can't occur yet pending other steps that haven't happened.
Its not like you can grant permission then click your fingers and as if by magic every single house in an entire development is 100% built and ready the day after permission was granted.
There will always be houses in the pipeline, either next to be built, or being built, or stalled for other reasons. But widening the pipeline would allow more houses to be built each year. Saying "build those with permission first" is as much an excuse as those who want everything to be brownfield.
Its never going to be possible to have 0 homes with permission that are still to be built, unless you invent a way to magically build every house in a plan on the very day permission is granted. Is that your solution?
I don't think we're going to ever agree. My perception of the housing market is that large house builders are inimical to it working fairly and will cynically drag any value out to the detriment of their customers and society as a whole.
I'm sure the planning system does hinder the construction of homes to an extent but I do not see it as the rate determining step you do. My true bias is that when we had to build large quantities of housing it happened because of the state and it will be to the state we return.
Excellent article, and a reminder that much of the culture war is based on age, not class.
However surely the government policy on housing is extremely clear, drive up prices whilst pretending they are helping buyers. Sadly the electorate are dim enough to buy this fiction, not understanding that the "help" to buyers is what's making it expensive for buyers. As long as we keep low interest rates their policy will remain effective, and I am not sure anyone, however much economic understanding or knowledge they have, truly has a good grasp of how long governments can maintain ultra low interest rates or how bad it will get when that period ends.
Question. Is it legal to park a car literally plastered in party logos directly outside the door of the polling station?
Yes , so long as it is outside the precinct
There is a statuary distance of, from memory, 50 yards, unless it's on private property. You need to talk to the Presiding Officer or the RO or their Deputy.
I dont think there's statutory limit. 100 m is sometimes mentioned , but this is just RO guidance to local political parties.
From years of doing this I've had it drilled into me that you don't take party materials anywhere near a polling station. I always removed a rosette even though I knew that was allowed.
Alex Salmond cames across as an arrogant bastard. I am parking here and who are you to ask me if it's ok. I was polite!
Within the precinct - being the grounds - of the polling station, rules are very strict. You shouldn’t really display the party or candidate name, and I have come across some areas where ROs still insist and therefore a blank coloured rosette was all you were allowed. The electoral commission guidance nowadays is a little more relaxed and simply requires that any such material be unobtrusive.
Beyond the polling station there is no jurisdiction to enforce any such rules, which is why the guidelines sometimes issued to the parties are just that - guidance.
There is an electoral commission rule prohibiting party logos and materials in the immediate vicinity of the polling centre which I posted earlier. At best they can be asked to move on - and he did. Having said that the law (these rules) don't apply to candidates.
BTW we're talking a narrow pavement between his car and the entrance door. Coming from one side you'd need to siddle past him to gain entry.
The rules all apply “in the polling station”, which includes its precinct.
Some concrete numbers from Waverley (Surrey, mixed Con/LD/Residents councillors, Lab making a more serious effort than before but not expecting a gain). 26.6% of the electorate have ordered PVs, and 59.7% of those have actually voted (more will arrive today, but should be close to the final figure), so 16% of all voters have voted before today. Voting today is described as "steady with occasional queues". Guess at final figure: 35-40%? No party is making a serious telling effort, though a few candidates are hanging around smiling hopefully at voters.
That’s fascinating. Is that the normal run rate for returned postal votes? I’d always assumed that those who bothered to ask for one would bother to return it.
Yes, I am always bemused to canvass a PVer who says "Nah, I never bother, mate", and used to think this was just code for "Not voting for YOU", but apparently 40% actually mean it. It's especially striking as about a fifth of the PVers here signed up recently. As I recall, at GEs the figure for PVs is nearer 75-80%, but others here may have more accurate info.
However woke you might think you are now, 100s of years ago, somebody connected to you always did something cancellable by modern standards....episode 10014...
Following yesterday’s story pointing out The Guardian’s silence over the report into its historical links to slavery, Guido can now exclusively reveal that the report for the Scott Trust has been undertaken – yet remains unreleased.
The independent investigation – which was commissioned by The Guardian’s owner the Scott Trust – began its research back in July, after Guido identified the paper’s support for the Confederacy during the American Civil War, and that its founder made his fortune in the cotton trade. Ten months later, The Guardian is still keeping quiet on the report’s findings.
The report’s lead author, Dr. Sheryllynne Haggerty, confirmed that not only had the investigation concluded, it was also only ever ‘a scoping report‘ in the first place – which suggests to Guido that its results were obvious from the start. Clearly, The Guardian has been covering up the investigation’s findings for some time…
As someone fairly close to the coal face on this thread, there's a LOT going on to get first time buyers in to new homes. First of all wherever I drive around our local towns and villages, there are housing estates galore going up, Tring, Aylesbury, Leighton Buzzard and thousands on the new M1 junction behind Houghton Regis for example.
Then there's the LISA and HTB ISA, the rebirth of 95% LTV mortgages (and lots of 90%) plus new initiatives like Nationwide's Helping Hand criteria just launched where income multiples of circa 5.5x are now possible for long term fixes for FTBs. I've client's children who've not been able to get on the ladder due to affordability constraints but having mustered a bit of a deposit but who now can with these things happening. It's very exciting for them (and for me!) to have good news now.
Only a small snippet but that's my perspective.
So much life wished away to buy a new build clone. This obsession with getting on the market no matter the cost will stagnate the young. You can't have a dynamic economy if your peoples lives are dedicated to propping up Taylor Wimpey's balance sheet. 5.5x multiples, fucking madness. What next signing up your unborn for another 25 years of servitude to Barratt. The fuckers in government have already been floating the use of what limited DC pensions we have to prop up the sick economy we will inherit.
If Barratt and Taylor Wimpey didn't exist we'd be looking at 10x multiples not 5.5x ones.
Really good trolling. The house builders have helped keep prices down, fucking brilliant. Coming up next Persimmon have a vested interest in building affordable housing.
let 10x multiples happen, make housing truly unaffordable to the majority. We'll just be skipping another 15 years of conservative policy to end up with it anyway. And maybe a few suckers will have avoided the ponzi scheme.
Its time investing in productive assets was made government policy. We could all fund a chip industry at least it will fucking make something and we will be less beholden to the house builders.
No trolling. Absolutely 100% yes the house builders have helped keep prices down, and absolutely 100% yes Persimmon do have a vested interest in building affordable housing. If their homes are unaffordable, they won't get sold, they won't make a profit.
The sole issue is that population has risen much faster than housing - and that the amount of land dripped out to be able to be built in is in many areas insufficient to keep up with population demands. That's not the house builders fault.
If any and all land could be built on, outside of very tightly defined protected areas, then we could have much greater housing capacity, more houses built and more affordable ones too. Trying to constrain land supply is the issue.
Assuming we are entirely supply constrained the house builders will benefit no? They can set the prices at the very limit to which the market is able to support. See the 3-4 bedroom 'executive clones' popping up all over Yorkshire.
Do you not accept that the largest home builders have the UK over a barrel. Yes they will build and drip feed homes into an area. But if you earn anything near an average income your gonna have to tale the most leverage you can afford and whatever inducement the government is offering at the time.
No of course I don't accept that, don't be silly.
Land is drip fed by the Councils, not the builders. If the Councils released huge swathes of land to be built on then if the large home builders didn't build on it then new companies could easily be created that would do so. But they can't, because the land hasn't got permission.
From the LGA: House builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build.
The LGA is working on an online map showing where these are. The full report is balanced and examines a variety of relevant issues:
"Planning is not a barrier to building. Councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications and in 2017 they worked with developers to grant planning permission to over 350,000 homes, an 11-year high. In fact house builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build. This is a positive base reflecting improving economic conditions following the recession"
"Councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications" is another one of those ridiculous meaningless statements to distract. People don't put in applications they know will be refused.
By only allowing a small amount of land to be built on, the applications go in for that land - but all the other land that could have been built on if permission weren't denied never gets applications in the first place!
I think you're ignoring
'house builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build'
Seems like they're doing well enough at the planning stage but suffering when it come to throwing down the concrete.
What is the average time period to go from start to planning permission fully granted? What is the maximum time?
I believe that 123,151 new homes were registered in 2020 and 160,319 in 2019.
Taking the lower figure, we have 3.43 years worth of planning permission.
If we can get an idea of how long permission takes to be granted we can then judge the scale of the pipeline "stock".
I see your point. And I would add that the land owned or under contract for home builders but not yet put out for planning should also be tallied.
As someone fairly close to the coal face on this thread, there's a LOT going on to get first time buyers in to new homes. First of all wherever I drive around our local towns and villages, there are housing estates galore going up, Tring, Aylesbury, Leighton Buzzard and thousands on the new M1 junction behind Houghton Regis for example.
Then there's the LISA and HTB ISA, the rebirth of 95% LTV mortgages (and lots of 90%) plus new initiatives like Nationwide's Helping Hand criteria just launched where income multiples of circa 5.5x are now possible for long term fixes for FTBs. I've client's children who've not been able to get on the ladder due to affordability constraints but having mustered a bit of a deposit but who now can with these things happening. It's very exciting for them (and for me!) to have good news now.
Only a small snippet but that's my perspective.
So much life wished away to buy a new build clone. This obsession with getting on the market no matter the cost will stagnate the young. You can't have a dynamic economy if your peoples lives are dedicated to propping up Taylor Wimpey's balance sheet. 5.5x multiples, fucking madness. What next signing up your unborn for another 25 years of servitude to Barratt. The fuckers in government have already been floating the use of what limited DC pensions we have to prop up the sick economy we will inherit.
If Barratt and Taylor Wimpey didn't exist we'd be looking at 10x multiples not 5.5x ones.
Really good trolling. The house builders have helped keep prices down, fucking brilliant. Coming up next Persimmon have a vested interest in building affordable housing.
let 10x multiples happen, make housing truly unaffordable to the majority. We'll just be skipping another 15 years of conservative policy to end up with it anyway. And maybe a few suckers will have avoided the ponzi scheme.
Its time investing in productive assets was made government policy. We could all fund a chip industry at least it will fucking make something and we will be less beholden to the house builders.
No trolling. Absolutely 100% yes the house builders have helped keep prices down, and absolutely 100% yes Persimmon do have a vested interest in building affordable housing. If their homes are unaffordable, they won't get sold, they won't make a profit.
The sole issue is that population has risen much faster than housing - and that the amount of land dripped out to be able to be built in is in many areas insufficient to keep up with population demands. That's not the house builders fault.
If any and all land could be built on, outside of very tightly defined protected areas, then we could have much greater housing capacity, more houses built and more affordable ones too. Trying to constrain land supply is the issue.
Assuming we are entirely supply constrained the house builders will benefit no? They can set the prices at the very limit to which the market is able to support. See the 3-4 bedroom 'executive clones' popping up all over Yorkshire.
Do you not accept that the largest home builders have the UK over a barrel. Yes they will build and drip feed homes into an area. But if you earn anything near an average income your gonna have to tale the most leverage you can afford and whatever inducement the government is offering at the time.
No of course I don't accept that, don't be silly.
Land is drip fed by the Councils, not the builders. If the Councils released huge swathes of land to be built on then if the large home builders didn't build on it then new companies could easily be created that would do so. But they can't, because the land hasn't got permission.
From the LGA: House builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build.
The LGA is working on an online map showing where these are. The full report is balanced and examines a variety of relevant issues:
"Planning is not a barrier to building. Councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications and in 2017 they worked with developers to grant planning permission to over 350,000 homes, an 11-year high. In fact house builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build. This is a positive base reflecting improving economic conditions following the recession"
"Councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications" is another one of those ridiculous meaningless statements to distract. People don't put in applications they know will be refused.
By only allowing a small amount of land to be built on, the applications go in for that land - but all the other land that could have been built on if permission weren't denied never gets applications in the first place!
I think you're ignoring
'house builders currently have 423,000 homes with permission that they are still to build'
Seems like they're doing well enough at the planning stage but suffering when it come to throwing down the concrete.
No I'm not because its completely meaningless gibberish. It takes time to get things built, you can't just snap your fingers and have it done overnight. There will always be a pipeline of houses due to be built. That includes houses where developers have received permission for an entire project but it will take years to build all of them, in phases, even though construction has already begun. It also includes houses where permission has been granted in principle, but construction can't occur yet pending other steps that haven't happened.
Its not like you can grant permission then click your fingers and as if by magic every single house in an entire development is 100% built and ready the day after permission was granted.
There will always be houses in the pipeline, either next to be built, or being built, or stalled for other reasons. But widening the pipeline would allow more houses to be built each year. Saying "build those with permission first" is as much an excuse as those who want everything to be brownfield.
Its never going to be possible to have 0 homes with permission that are still to be built, unless you invent a way to magically build every house in a plan on the very day permission is granted. Is that your solution?
I don't think we're going to ever agree. My perception of the housing market is that large house builders are inimical to it working fairly and will cynically drag any value out to the detriment of their customers and society as a whole.
I'm sure the planning system does hinder the construction of homes to an extent but I do not see it as the rate determining step you do. My true bias is that when we had to build large quantities of housing it happened because of the state and it will be to the state we return.
I half agree with you. The state is the one standing in the way of large quantities being built and the state can resolve the issue. And if the issue isn't resolved then people might turn to the state, despite the fact that the state was the roadblock.
If you think that landbanks are the issue and not the planning system, then the thing to look at would be landbanks that have been held and not developed for a period of years. Not simply including banks that include homes were construction is ongoing or scheduled.
How many houses are "banked" that have permission now, which had full permission five years ago? That is what should be measured. If landbanks were the issue then there'd be many hundreds of thousands that had permission then that are still unbuilt and have permission now, but I doubt it.
Question. Is it legal to park a car literally plastered in party logos directly outside the door of the polling station?
Yes , so long as it is outside the precinct
There is a statuary distance of, from memory, 50 yards, unless it's on private property. You need to talk to the Presiding Officer or the RO or their Deputy.
I dont think there's statutory limit. 100 m is sometimes mentioned , but this is just RO guidance to local political parties.
From years of doing this I've had it drilled into me that you don't take party materials anywhere near a polling station. I always removed a rosette even though I knew that was allowed.
Alex Salmond cames across as an arrogant bastard. I am parking here and who are you to ask me if it's ok. I was polite!
Within the precinct - being the grounds - of the polling station, rules are very strict. You shouldn’t really display the party or candidate name, and I have come across some areas where ROs still insist and therefore a blank coloured rosette was all you were allowed. The electoral commission guidance nowadays is a little more relaxed and simply requires that any such material be unobtrusive.
Beyond the polling station there is no jurisdiction to enforce any such rules, which is why the guidelines sometimes issued to the parties are just that - guidance.
There is an electoral commission rule prohibiting party logos and materials in the immediate vicinity of the polling centre which I posted earlier. At best they can be asked to move on - and he did. Having said that the law (these rules) don't apply to candidates.
BTW we're talking a narrow pavement between his car and the entrance door. Coming from one side you'd need to siddle past him to gain entry.
The most innovative bending of the rules came in the Greenwich by-election. Rosie Barnes' agent had so many volunteer helpers he arranged for a number to walk up and down outside the polling stations with A-frame posters.
One by-election I wish I hadn’t bothered to visit. What a liability she turned out to be.
I don't get the joke - does the cartoonist think that the Jersey affair is bad for Boris ?
Are they mad ?
The people who appear to have shot themselves in the foot are the French.
Under the previous treaty they were supposed to record and submit annual catches to the Jersey authorities. In twenty years they never bothered.
The treaty the EU has agreed with the UK requires that French fisherman are allowed to catch what they have done so historically - based on records. The suspicion must be that those records don't exist.....hence the bullying and bluster. They've already had a 4 month "grace period" to get their act together - so Macron's "surprise" rings hollow - in the meantime they've stopped Jersey fishermen landing their catch in France - and have indulged in unrestricted fishing - taking unsustainably large quantities of scallops out of Jersey waters.
Basically its the EU facing BREXIT paperwork that the UK has since January.
Question. Is it legal to park a car literally plastered in party logos directly outside the door of the polling station?
I just passed Brian Rose campaigning in the City...
Must realise he’s about to be thrashed by a man with a bin on his head.
I'm actually quite sad about not having the opportunity to vote for Mr Binface himself.
Social media decided I live in London (which I don't) and so over the past few weeks I have been spammed with election adverts....After having to endure LaurenceFox mug popping up seemingly every day on my feeds, the least I should be able to do is go and vote for somebody else.
Some concrete numbers from Waverley (Surrey, mixed Con/LD/Residents councillors, Lab making a more serious effort than before but not expecting a gain). 26.6% of the electorate have ordered PVs, and 59.7% of those have actually voted (more will arrive today, but should be close to the final figure), so 16% of all voters have voted before today. Voting today is described as "steady with occasional queues". Guess at final figure: 35-40%? No party is making a serious telling effort, though a few candidates are hanging around smiling hopefully at voters.
Some concrete numbers from Waverley (Surrey, mixed Con/LD/Residents councillors, Lab making a more serious effort than before but not expecting a gain). 26.6% of the electorate have ordered PVs, and 59.7% of those have actually voted (more will arrive today, but should be close to the final figure), so 16% of all voters have voted before today. Voting today is described as "steady with occasional queues". Guess at final figure: 35-40%? No party is making a serious telling effort, though a few candidates are hanging around smiling hopefully at voters.
I think you underestimate the number that will come in on the day, given that any polling station can now take them in. The key takeaway from your data is that possibly around half of all the votes will have been cast by post, which is likely to be a record.
The International Olympic Committee has accepted an offer from Pfizer to provide its vaccines to athletes preparing to compete in Tokyo in July for this year's postponed Games. The vaccines will be made available to each country's Olympic and Paralympic committee for those participating and support staff.
Just back from voting (Parish, Town and PCC). Three people voting ahead of me, but can't say if that's busy or not as this is the first time I've voted at lunchtime (normally on way to or back from work). I find it odd that they don't have a separate box for the different elections...
Presumably you have a small polling district? Mine is larger following boundary changes and they had separate boxes.
All the boxes for all the elections have to be emptied and verified, before any count can begin, since even with separate boxes and diligent staff there is always the odd paper that gets into the wrong box.
Worth remembering that a big stand-off with the UK is as beneficial to Macron politically as a big stand-off with France is to Johnson. That means both sides have every reason to escalate, sabre rattle and generally behave ridiculously. This one will run and run!
It's an elaborate dance. It's worth bearing in mind the Royal Navy boats are doing absolutely nothing, they're just watching.
It's a military version of WWE, at a very safe distance.
If there is any chance at all of things turning hot then Biden would pick up the phone and then it would be over. He could degrade the British Trident boats and French carrier by just suspending USN support for both programs.
Perhaps he thinks a mutual war of annihilation would be in US interests.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
Question. Is it legal to park a car literally plastered in party logos directly outside the door of the polling station?
Yes , so long as it is outside the precinct
Having re-checked the guidance it is a question of proportionality. A teller wearing a rosette is OK. I am not sure that a car plastered in large Alba signs at the doorway of the polling station is OK.
"Is it legal to literally park your car outside the front door of the polling station Mr Salmond?" I asked. "The law doesn't apply to candidates." "I think it does. Are you going to move or do I need to complain to the returning officer?"
He moved the car. Have since been told that when he is not driving round with his megaphone that he has literally parked the Alba-mobile outside a stack of polling stations.
From the Electoral Commission's guidance: "Tellers should not display or distribute election material (e.g. billboards, posters, placards or pamphlets) on walls or around the polling place. Any display of such material should be brought to the attention of the Presiding Officer immediately." The Electoral Commission also notes that advice to tellers applies to anyone.
You are misreading it if you are taking “around the polling place” to refer to the street outside. It means inside the precinct.
Land is drip fed by the Councils, not the builders. If the Councils released huge swathes of land to be built on then if the large home builders didn't build on it then new companies could easily be created that would do so. But they can't, because the land hasn't got permission.
Absolute nonsense from Mt Thompson. Councils do not hold land which they "drip feed" to developers.
Developers get hold of land and ask for permission to build. 90% of their applications are approved.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
Don't be silly. Only in this country is there a significant part of the political and media establishment who thoroughly despise their own country and anything it does or says, irrespective of merit. It's almost unique.
I thought it was interesting that the banners by footie fans were more pithy and effective than the sopping wet McTory campaign who probably paid some agency a large sum.
Effective in what sense? No one likes us, we don't care, and I know we smashed up the city center a few weeks ago, but could I interest you in voting for/against party X?
The 'Bears' are waging a fairly relentless online campaign against any Rangers fans expressing favourability towards Indy or the SNP. I don't think they've quite cracked this persuasion lark.
The Union Bears are a toxic combination of the BNP and the Orange Lodge. Mancunians will remember how pleasant they are. They are not a group that immediately spring to mind when discussing democracy.
Land is drip fed by the Councils, not the builders. If the Councils released huge swathes of land to be built on then if the large home builders didn't build on it then new companies could easily be created that would do so. But they can't, because the land hasn't got permission.
Absolute nonsense from Mt Thompson. Councils do not hold land which they "drip feed" to developers.
Developers get hold of land and ask for permission to build. 90% of their applications are approved.
Councils don't need to hold the land, they just need to determine which land is authorised for development and which isn't. 😒
Another glorious page in British history has been written. Even in 4000 years, schoolchildren will be singing Boris Johnson's and the fishermens' names. Roads will be renamed.
Another glorious page in British history has been written. Even in 4000 years, schoolchildren will be singing Boris Johnson's and the fishermens' names. Roads will be renamed.
It is amusing, but it's worth noting this at least was not something he manufactured, Macron did. Hes done it a lot this year even though his election is some ways off.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
Don't be silly. Only in this country is there a significant part of the political and media establishment who thoroughly despise their own country and anything it does or says, irrespective of merit. It's almost unique.
I don't think it's unique. The US definitely has a rather noisy equivalent, although that may be a relatively new development. Other countries also do, you just don't hear much from them.
And today's most important tweet from Count Binface
Whoever you vote for, do vote if you can. Democracy is amazing and, believe it or not, not many planets have it. Politicians are your servants, and today's the day you can give them a pat on the back. From either your hand or a cow, depending on whether they're any good. Enjoy! 10:24 AM · May 6, 2021·TweetDeck
I don't get the joke - does the cartoonist think that the Jersey affair is bad for Boris ?
Are they mad ?
My personal theory is that at least half of political cartoons don't have a point, they are just some combination of a politician and a recent news story which they hope will 'Strike a chord'.
Just remember: In the last 6 weeks you've been able to get almost evens on Nicola Sturgeon surviving the year and 1/2 on Boris Johnson surviving another 14 months. I have some sympathy for the view that Sturgeon got near trouble at one point, but mostly I think these show how the markets overreact to news.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
That's why Lib Dems should never have the levers of power. Totally untrustworthy.
Given Boris has just won a thumping victory over the French by lunchtime, do I now have to go out and vote Tory?
The boats have gone because talks have finished. Is the outcome yet public?
If you trawl the 'net there's nothing being brought to the surface at the moment. I assume journalists are fishing for scraps but both the French and UK governments aren't taking the bait.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
Don't be silly. Only in this country is there a significant part of the political and media establishment who thoroughly despise their own country and anything it does or says, irrespective of merit. It's almost unique.
I don't think it's unique. The US definitely has a rather noisy equivalent, although that may be a relatively new development. Other countries also do, you just don't hear much from them.
There was that interesting chart shared yesterday about left and right views on being proud of the country, with UK and USA being odd in having a big disparity vs France and Germany etc. Not sure why we'd be so different, plenty of people on left who are proud.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
Don't be silly. Only in this country is there a significant part of the political and media establishment who thoroughly despise their own country and anything it does or says, irrespective of merit. It's almost unique.
I despise my country. However, I despise the French even more.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
That's why Lib Dems should never have the levers of power. Totally untrustworthy.
On the contrary - given criticism the LDs get is having been too reliable a governing partner of the Tories in coalition.
Back from voting. Two of my votes were for Conservative candidates. I did so quite explicitly as a one-off 'thank you' to Boris for his Government's vaccine rollout. They are saving lives, it's brilliant and I wanted to express my gratitude.
They have no guarantee that I would vote for them again.
Back from voting. Two of my votes were for Conservative candidates. I did so quite explicitly as a one-off 'thank you' to Boris for his Government's vaccine rollout. They are saving lives, it's brilliant and I wanted to express my gratitude.
They have no guarantee that I would vote for them again.
What would make you vote for / stop you voting for them again ?
Back from voting. Two of my votes were for Conservative candidates. I did so quite explicitly as a one-off 'thank you' to Boris for his Government's vaccine rollout. They are saving lives, it's brilliant and I wanted to express my gratitude.
They have no guarantee that I would vote for them again.
I have a dilemma - I really like my local Lib Dem - but your point about thanking the government just hit home.
Some concrete numbers from Waverley (Surrey, mixed Con/LD/Residents councillors, Lab making a more serious effort than before but not expecting a gain). 26.6% of the electorate have ordered PVs, and 59.7% of those have actually voted (more will arrive today, but should be close to the final figure), so 16% of all voters have voted before today. Voting today is described as "steady with occasional queues". Guess at final figure: 35-40%? No party is making a serious telling effort, though a few candidates are hanging around smiling hopefully at voters.
Some concrete numbers from Waverley (Surrey, mixed Con/LD/Residents councillors, Lab making a more serious effort than before but not expecting a gain). 26.6% of the electorate have ordered PVs, and 59.7% of those have actually voted (more will arrive today, but should be close to the final figure), so 16% of all voters have voted before today. Voting today is described as "steady with occasional queues". Guess at final figure: 35-40%? No party is making a serious telling effort, though a few candidates are hanging around smiling hopefully at voters.
I think you underestimate the number that will come in on the day, given that any polling station can now take them in. The key takeaway from your data is that possibly around half of all the votes will have been cast by post, which is likely to be a record.
Had a lunchtime report from two polling stations on just this point - the number of PVs handed in was 0 and 1 respectively.
But I'm sure you're right that the proportion of votes cast by post will be a record. Perhaps eventually it will be like Switzerland, where 90% vote by post and campaigning accordingly stops a couple of days before the election. They see voting by hand as antiquated as writing a handwritten business letter - sure, you can do it, by why take the trouble?
Sky News running a piece with an Oxford academic (no not the nutty Gupta) talking about how lots of the COVID measures are at best useless all the way through to making the situation worse.
e.g. constant cleaning surfaces / things people have touched, CDC now say basically no transmission this way. Perspex screens, probably make the situation worse as limits airflow.
Sky News running a piece with an Oxford academic (no not the nutty Gupta) talking about how lots of the COVID measures are at best useless all the way through to making the situation worse.
e.g. constant cleaning surfaces / things people have touched, CDC now say basically no transmission this way. Perspex screens, probably make the situation worse as limits airflow.
Vote counting is a real hassle as theyll be doing lots of breaks to wipe things down, spray surfaces and door handles etc.
I had intended to not vote Tory today. Thought I'd give the Lib Dems a look, given their opposition to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny over lockdown. But Jeez, they make it difficult. Layla Moran now appears to be siding with he French over Jersey. Is there any chance of these people taking a pro-British stance on something?
Don't be silly. Only in this country is there a significant part of the political and media establishment who thoroughly despise their own country and anything it does or says, irrespective of merit. It's almost unique.
I despise my country. However, I despise the French even more.
I'm fond of my country, and various others where I've lived. But I think apparent hostility is mostly reaction against the more excessive forms of nationalism. If someone tells me that British is always best, I'll make a derisive noise. But doesn't mean we're not sometimes best, or usually good.
Land is drip fed by the Councils, not the builders. If the Councils released huge swathes of land to be built on then if the large home builders didn't build on it then new companies could easily be created that would do so. But they can't, because the land hasn't got permission.
Absolute nonsense from Mt Thompson. Councils do not hold land which they "drip feed" to developers.
Developers get hold of land and ask for permission to build. 90% of their applications are approved.
Councils don't need to hold the land, they just need to determine which land is authorised for development and which isn't. 😒
Which they do when the application for development comes in.
They don't forbid it on a just in case basis.
I think you are learning, Mr Thompson, or starting to.
Back from voting. Two of my votes were for Conservative candidates. I did so quite explicitly as a one-off 'thank you' to Boris for his Government's vaccine rollout. They are saving lives, it's brilliant and I wanted to express my gratitude.
They have no guarantee that I would vote for them again.
I have a dilemma - I really like my local Lib Dem - but your point about thanking the government just hit home.
Local Tories have no issue taking the government to task when they need to, dont see why they deserve reward for government action.
Of course the flip side is they often get punished for government actions too.
On topic I'm not totally sure Robert has got this right and I don't think it really merits the 'bollocks' dismissal of counter theories.
He's right about Thatcher but, factually, she was on her knees in 1981 and it definitely was NOT housing that brought her back. It really WAS the Falklands. The national pride and euphoria was tangible. Remember it came after Dennis Healey had been reduced to calling in the IMF to bail Britain out, followed by the appalling winter of discontent. We were the sick man of Europe. Then Maggie slayed the Argies, recaptured lands that no one had ever heard of and lots of people thought this was worthy of a resounding national cheer. Enough to sweep her to victory in 1983 against a left wing rag and bone man.
2020 was Boris' 1981. This is his Falklands time.
And that's without considering that Thatcher truly was a titan on the world stage alongside Reagan during the latter stages of the Cold War, and to an extent was a reason why the "West" won.
On topic, becoming homeowners is what begets Tory voters, it is roughly the moment the majority of younger voters stop being lefties and become (fiscal) Conservatives.
Even house prices ooop North are becoming disconnected from salaries.
Given Boris has just won a thumping victory over the French by lunchtime, do I now have to go out and vote Tory?
The boats have gone because talks have finished. Is the outcome yet public?
There isn't an outcome.
Jersey explained that the treaty the EU signed requires French fishermen to provide proof of their catches over the last 3 years - proof there is a good chance does not exist, as under the previous treaty they didn't supply the records once in 20 years.
This is "Brexit red tape" from the other end (you know, the stuff the UK has been dealing with since January).
Back from voting. Two of my votes were for Conservative candidates. I did so quite explicitly as a one-off 'thank you' to Boris for his Government's vaccine rollout. They are saving lives, it's brilliant and I wanted to express my gratitude.
They have no guarantee that I would vote for them again.
What would make you vote for / stop you voting for them again ?
I try to weigh up various pros and cons of the different parties and candidates which means I'm not a diehard anything. However, it's very rare for me to vote Conservative. I'm trying to think when I last did.
I just felt that on this occasion I wanted to say thank you. They have been brilliant on vaccines and, unlike many places now under the covid cosh, we are getting our lives back. I felt that on this occasion it deserved my gratitude.
@kateferguson4: Hearing that voter turnout is high in some parts of Hartlepool - particularly the more affluent parts of the town. Which would be good news for the Tories
@kateferguson4: Hearing that voter turnout is high in some parts of Hartlepool - particularly the more affluent parts of the town. Which would be good news for the Tories
On topic: I think this is bang on, and housing of all shades would be number 1 on my Labour priorities list.
Look, Labour need not fear upsetting older people one bit, it is the Tories that are beholden to the old 'uns and that will be their undoing. Labour will likely need to get into power to address all the generational things that the Tories cannot touch - social care, housing supply to an extent that is market changing, the triple lock.
And as for the north, Uncle Boris might bung the Red Wall a tenner for sweeties, but a genuine detailed analysis of what these towns should be for and what they need in 2021 and the coming decades, not so much I think - Boris doesn't run that deep. If Labour can work this out and deliver a genuinely reconnecting Passport to Peterlee manifesto,, then I'm in.
@kateferguson4: Hearing that voter turnout is high in some parts of Hartlepool - particularly the more affluent parts of the town. Which would be good news for the Tories
Comments
Are they mad ?
I'm sure the planning system does hinder the construction of homes to an extent but I do not see it as the rate determining step you do. My true bias is that when we had to build large quantities of housing it happened because of the state and it will be to the state we return.
However surely the government policy on housing is extremely clear, drive up prices whilst pretending they are helping buyers. Sadly the electorate are dim enough to buy this fiction, not understanding that the "help" to buyers is what's making it expensive for buyers. As long as we keep low interest rates their policy will remain effective, and I am not sure anyone, however much economic understanding or knowledge they have, truly has a good grasp of how long governments can maintain ultra low interest rates or how bad it will get when that period ends.
Good thread header though.
Following yesterday’s story pointing out The Guardian’s silence over the report into its historical links to slavery, Guido can now exclusively reveal that the report for the Scott Trust has been undertaken – yet remains unreleased.
The independent investigation – which was commissioned by The Guardian’s owner the Scott Trust – began its research back in July, after Guido identified the paper’s support for the Confederacy during the American Civil War, and that its founder made his fortune in the cotton trade. Ten months later, The Guardian is still keeping quiet on the report’s findings.
The report’s lead author, Dr. Sheryllynne Haggerty, confirmed that not only had the investigation concluded, it was also only ever ‘a scoping report‘ in the first place – which suggests to Guido that its results were obvious from the start. Clearly, The Guardian has been covering up the investigation’s findings for some time…
https://order-order.com/2021/05/06/exclusive-scott-trust-commissioned-report-into-slavery-links-covered-up-by-guardian/
If you think that landbanks are the issue and not the planning system, then the thing to look at would be landbanks that have been held and not developed for a period of years. Not simply including banks that include homes were construction is ongoing or scheduled.
How many houses are "banked" that have permission now, which had full permission five years ago? That is what should be measured. If landbanks were the issue then there'd be many hundreds of thousands that had permission then that are still unbuilt and have permission now, but I doubt it.
Under the previous treaty they were supposed to record and submit annual catches to the Jersey authorities. In twenty years they never bothered.
The treaty the EU has agreed with the UK requires that French fisherman are allowed to catch what they have done so historically - based on records. The suspicion must be that those records don't exist.....hence the bullying and bluster. They've already had a 4 month "grace period" to get their act together - so Macron's "surprise" rings hollow - in the meantime they've stopped Jersey fishermen landing their catch in France - and have indulged in unrestricted fishing - taking unsustainably large quantities of scallops out of Jersey waters.
Basically its the EU facing BREXIT paperwork that the UK has since January.
The International Olympic Committee has accepted an offer from Pfizer to provide its vaccines to athletes preparing to compete in Tokyo in July for this year's postponed Games. The vaccines will be made available to each country's Olympic and Paralympic committee for those participating and support staff.
All the boxes for all the elections have to be emptied and verified, before any count can begin, since even with separate boxes and diligent staff there is always the odd paper that gets into the wrong box.
https://twitter.com/drphiliplee1/status/1390279431248302081
Developers get hold of land and ask for permission to build. 90% of their applications are approved.
The UK economy will enjoy its strongest growth in more than 70 years in 2021 as Covid-19 restrictions are lifted, according to the Bank of England.
There's not been any reliable evidence that it ever existed.
Whoever you vote for, do vote if you can. Democracy is amazing and, believe it or not, not many planets have it. Politicians are your servants, and today's the day you can give them a pat on the back. From either your hand or a cow, depending on whether they're any good. Enjoy!
10:24 AM · May 6, 2021·TweetDeck
https://twitter.com/CountBinface/status/1390236001243701250
"frogs have run off" LOL
Which is ironically topical given that today's by-election is in Hartlepool where they know all monkeys are French spies.
Jamie Driscoll, what an inspiration he is.
They have no guarantee that I would vote for them again.
Well - so they did
You can rest assured that I did not vote for him.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1390287386660196355?s=20
But I'm sure you're right that the proportion of votes cast by post will be a record. Perhaps eventually it will be like Switzerland, where 90% vote by post and campaigning accordingly stops a couple of days before the election. They see voting by hand as antiquated as writing a handwritten business letter - sure, you can do it, by why take the trouble?
e.g. constant cleaning surfaces / things people have touched, CDC now say basically no transmission this way. Perspex screens, probably make the situation worse as limits airflow.
Good on France and the UK for providing something newsworthy but petty to displace the brisk voting and dogs outside polling stations.
They don't forbid it on a just in case basis.
I think you are learning, Mr Thompson, or starting to.
Of course the flip side is they often get punished for government actions too.
https://twitter.com/LeanTossup/status/1390293505688457223
LeanTossup
@LeanTossup
The LeanTossup model has Hartlepool being won by the Tories. https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/
Even house prices ooop North are becoming disconnected from salaries.
Jersey explained that the treaty the EU signed requires French fishermen to provide proof of their catches over the last 3 years - proof there is a good chance does not exist, as under the previous treaty they didn't supply the records once in 20 years.
This is "Brexit red tape" from the other end (you know, the stuff the UK has been dealing with since January).
I just felt that on this occasion I wanted to say thank you. They have been brilliant on vaccines and, unlike many places now under the covid cosh, we are getting our lives back. I felt that on this occasion it deserved my gratitude.
Turning into IDS all over again, Tories need SKS to stay in place.
@kateferguson4: Hearing that voter turnout is high in some parts of Hartlepool - particularly the more affluent parts of the town. Which would be good news for the Tories
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1390291521249894400
Look, Labour need not fear upsetting older people one bit, it is the Tories that are beholden to the old 'uns and that will be their undoing. Labour will likely need to get into power to address all the generational things that the Tories cannot touch - social care, housing supply to an extent that is market changing, the triple lock.
And as for the north, Uncle Boris might bung the Red Wall a tenner for sweeties, but a genuine detailed analysis of what these towns should be for and what they need in 2021 and the coming decades, not so much I think - Boris doesn't run that deep. If Labour can work this out and deliver a genuinely reconnecting Passport to Peterlee manifesto,, then I'm in.