Does anyone know the details of Labour's proposed planning reforms?
All I can see on BBC is that "planning is at the heart of reforms" but then silence on what those reforms are?
Our planning system and NIMBYism is the biggest barrier to growth and development in this country. But as far as reforms are concerned, I'll believe it when I see it.
Labour Manifesto:
Planning reform to build 1.5 million new homes ... Britain is hampered by a planning regime that means we struggle to build either the infrastructure or housing the country needs. ... The current planning regime acts as a major brake on economic growth. Labour will make the changes we need to forge ahead with new roads, railways, reservoirs, and other nationally significant infrastructure. We will set out new national policy statements, make major projects faster and cheaper by slashing red tape, and build support for developments by ensuring communities directly benefit. We will also update national planning policy to ensure the planning system meets the needs of a modern economy, making it easier to build laboratories, digital infrastructure, and gigafactories. ... We will ensure our industrial strategy supports the development of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) sector, removes planning barriers to new datacentres. ... We will immediately update the National Policy Planning Framework to undo damaging Conservative changes, including restoring mandatory housing targets...strengthen the presumption in favour of sustainable development. ... Appoint 300 new planning officers
The above is essentially everything from the Labour manifesto that mentions planning. There's a bit more detail on local plans, green belt, (& 5G!) etc, but nothing you'd miss.
The best thing you can say about it is that recruiting more planning officers should at least mean that planning applications are processed more quickly.
I guess we'd have to wait and see a future Planning Bill to get the detail. I expect that it's a long way from what you want.
Thanks.
Abolishing planning officers altogether by making planning automatic would be a far better policy. But looks like nobody is brave enough to embrace that approach unfortunately.
Looks like Labour at least understand the problem and are attempting a solution, even if its not enough its better than nothing.
I may have to lend them my vote.
Abolishing planning officers? Nonsense. Would make planning completely nonexistent. Housing estates built without the sewerage and processing ability, that sort of tyhing, a shitstorm in the most literal sense.
Yes, planning should be completely non existent.
It's the water firms responsibility to handle sewerage not housing developers. They need to do their own job, not pass the buck.
All developments should pay for is to connect to the network. Once it's in the network, it's not their responsibility anymore.
You obviously dfon't know that the sewerage network consists of pipes and processing plants. It's the latter that are the issue. They need to be built first. Before the houses. How else is that going to happen, if not planning? Otherwise you are demanding urban level sewerage facilities all over farmland, is the logical consequence of your vision. Just in case some dodgy shoebox merchant might want to build houses 15 miles from nowhere.
It's the water firms job to deal with processing plants.
If they haven't built enough they need to do their own job.
That's not an excuse to prevent construction any more than a shortage of construction is preventing population growth.
Absolutely urban level sewerage facilities are needed wherever they are needed.
But you keep ignoring the fact it's slower to build shit processing plants than the sort of shit houses you get now. Very tricky to find sites for them, too. So advance planning is needed.
Edit: where I live, the council has over the years repeatedly identified large swathes of land for new housing, but made sure the sewerage issue was handed over to the water authority in advance.
And you keep ignoring the fact it doesn't matter. People live here now.
You complain that if planning is reformed we'd get more houses now. Good! We need them now, not years from now.
Our population has already grown. Our demographics have already changed. We have a shortage of houses today, not years from now.
The water firms need to do their own bloody job. And if they don't they need to be fined heavily until they either do, or go bankrupt and have their assets taken from them as a result and given to someone who will do their job.
The water firms should be dealing with in advance of population changes, not housing changes. Housing needs to keep up with population and demographic changes and if water has fallen behind that is NOT an excuse to fail to build houses.
Unless you're prepared to identify millions of people to execute or deport, the houses are needed today not years from now.
Piss off, there's a good chum. I don't need any absolutist lectures from you. My area has expanded enormously and beyond recognition in terms of population and houses, repeatedly, with more coming as I can see from the Local Plan. Having the houses in reasonably sensible areas and with at least some shit processing ready first is a pretty small thing to ask.
What we do get from the libertarian and greedy developer is the attempt to cram more houses on school playing fields and children's local play areas - and that is the only time I've ever put in a complaint about a planning application: when a school was losing some of its playing fields. Your demand for no planning officers would allow that to run riot.
Excuses, excuses.
Nowhere has grown enough "beyond recognition".
Our population has grown. That means villages need to become towns, towns become cities and cities become bigger.
Tough shit if that means you don't recognise changes. Don't be so xenophobic, people need somewhere to live.
A icnrease of a factor of 3-4 times - not per cent - in my area is obviously not good enough for you. And I have tried to explain that I have recognised the need for the changes and didn't complain about them except where they were directly hurting people's most basic existi9ng amenities - no shitstorms, the need to keep places for children actually to play games. But as I can't do it in words of fewer than four letters I will just have to leave it at that.
Meanwhile, the more you come out with the stuff you do, the more the need for planning officers is confirmed.
I wouldn't worry. If he gets what he wants we can crowd fund a sardine tinning factory up wind of his estate.
And I'd have absolutely no objection to that.
So you're saying if we get what I want, we might have both housing growth and economic growth too?
And your objection to that is ... ?
Good. You'll be able to lend a hand when we contract for Whiskers on the weekends.
Can I nominate relocating "Re-Food"? The vats of, er, material, are fab.
Nigel Farage has defended the 41 candidates found to be social media “friends” of fascist leader, saying: “I apologise that not all of our candidates have been to Eton.”
Close to one in ten candidates for the Reform UK party in England was found to be connected on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the British fascist leader, The Times found.
So that's it? That's our choice, is it, Nigel? Eton or the Fourth Reich?
How about, instead, and this may seem like a radical proposal, but give it some thought: fuck off.
Strangely, your churlish post actually makes me want to defend it.
Beforehand I was going to write: "And that's why we don't vote Reform, folks."
So you were going to attack Nazi sympathies, but disagreeing with me is more important? Good good.
Someone from the other side of the political divide telling someone on my side, however loosely, to fuck off just makes us all want to bandy together.
Lesson to learn.
What on Earth has got into you Casino? You are one of the good guys on here, a gent. Yet recently every other post seems to be attacking a fellow PBer for some self-defined minor transgression or another? Wassup?
He's anticipating, for the first time in a decade and a half, a Labour government, and is understandably a bit grumpy about it. Casino wears his heart on his sleeve, which is fine. Just take his posts with a pinch of salt.
A pinch of salt, and a twist of lime. And the same again. And again. Again. Just give me the fucking bottle.
Just back from a day out, haven't followed the manifesto launch or anything else today, but have quickly skimmed the more obvious sections looking for evidence of taxation straightjackets.
I can't find anything beyond the pledges to leave corporation tax, income tax, VAT and NI rates unchanged. Is there anything else that I'm missing? I can't find anything that explicitly rules out rises in CGT, the introduction of wealth taxes, or reform of council tax, for example. There appears to be a plan to replace business rates and I'm wondering if the pledge to raise the same revenues in a different way might just shift into an opportunity to rinse the likes of Amazon for a lot more, little high street independents for a little less, and increase the net take?
Anyway, I suppose we'll find out in the Autumn whether Reeves is going to stick to the 'solving all our problems through growth alone' schtick, or deploy the 'OMG the books are even worse than we thought' excuse, and deploy a suite of tax hikes. We know perfectly well that if taxes aren't raised significantly and the promised boom fails to materialise PDQ, the no return to austerity pledge will end up in the dustbin.
I have a question for all you techies, which is a neat follow up to the Apple discussion.
I don’t currently use my Apple Watch for contactless payments on Apple Pay. Do you do so? If so, and in the words of Gandalf, "is it secret? Is it safe?”
Any advice / comments gratefully received.
xx
Not an Apple fan, I use Android, but yes I use contactless payments for ~99% of all my payments (Tesco pay@pump requires the use of a card annoyingly for the other 1%, Asda allows contactless at the pump). Though I normally use my phone more than my watch.
Its far safer than any other means of payment IMHO. And has no piddly £100 limit unlikely normal contactless so you can do big expenditures on it too, but its more secure doing so on your own secure device than on a card.
Apart from Express Pay (which only works on TfL services), it requires the use of a fingerprint or face. Both infinitely harder to break than a four digit pin which is as far as I can work out, is only a (1/10)^4 of guessing.
The risk at the minute appears to be from people snatching your phone from your hand while it's unlocked and draining bank accounts.
Supposedly if the phone is unlocked, it's easy to side load something that prevents it from locking again, then you can hack your way round the rest of the protections.
I am incredibly wary these days about how much of my life I am giving away if someone snatches my phone out of my hand, especially if unlocked.
Yep I’m very similar to you on this. Presumably the Apple Watch is a better bet then?
Husband pursues Apple after wife finds ‘deleted’ messages to prostitute
A businessman is preparing a legal case, claiming that his divorce was a direct result of compromising texts that had been wiped from his iPhone still being visible on the family iMac
An unfaithful husband who arranged meetings with prostitutes via messages on his iPhone is pursuing legal action against Apple after his wife discovered that his deleted messages were still stored on a linked computer.
Richard, not his real name, said he had turned to prostitutes in the last years of his marriage and had arranged the meetings through the iMessages app. After making the arrangements he would delete the messages, believing the trail of his infidelity had been hidden.
However, when his wife clicked on the same app on the family iMac, it showed that the last message he had sent to another person’s iPhone was to a prostitute. When she looked further she found several years’ worth of supposedly deleted messages to prostitutes.
She filed for divorce within a month.
Richard, a middle-aged businessman and father who lives in England but does not want to disclose his home town, is pursuing legal action against Apple in the hope of recovering more than £5 million he lost in the divorce, plus legal costs.
I have hopes that he might be rinsed for more than £5m if he pursues this case for long enough.
I am far from being an expert, but it'd be interesting to see exactly what his complaint is (the article is paywalled...). But the old adage of "the Internet never forgets" should always be borne in mind.
I'd guess he would argue that if he presses a "delete" key then he has a reasonable expectation of that deleting the data everywhere, and not just on the device where he presses the button, and that he suffered losses because Apple's software didn't conform to that reasonable expectation.
If the data had been found in the cloud, then he might have half an argument, but since it was on one of his other devices, he does not. And Apple could reasonably claim that his divorce was ultimately inevitable, given his behaviour. The wife would have found out another way eventually.
But, hopefully, he has just enough of an argument to keep lawyers gainfully employed for as long as the rest of his money lasts.
I just tested that, and was shocked it doesn’t delete on all devices - and I’m an IT manager! (Albeit one who never deletes anything that’s not spam).
The reasonable expectation would be that it works like modern cloud-based email, and not like 20-year-old POP email, that it actually syncs rather than simply downloading everywhere.
I am an it techie not a manager....the thought that it wouldnt delete everywhere is risible, anything that leaves your computer and goes via the internet is going to be still existent. This is why us techie guys never put anything on the internet unless it won't bother us when it is uncovered. My it managers are constantly surprised when stuff doesn't work as they think it should too, like the it managers at fujitsu and the post office.
As techie guys are team constantly gets into discussions with our it manager to explain why what he has asked for won't work....we constantly get told we are wrong and implement it as asked for and surprise surprise, sixth months later he is going why is this not working like I thought and we have to explain it to him again
I have a question for all you techies, which is a neat follow up to the Apple discussion.
I don’t currently use my Apple Watch for contactless payments on Apple Pay. Do you do so? If so, and in the words of Gandalf, "is it secret? Is it safe?”
Any advice / comments gratefully received.
xx
Not an Apple fan, I use Android, but yes I use contactless payments for ~99% of all my payments (Tesco pay@pump requires the use of a card annoyingly for the other 1%, Asda allows contactless at the pump). Though I normally use my phone more than my watch.
Its far safer than any other means of payment IMHO. And has no piddly £100 limit unlikely normal contactless so you can do big expenditures on it too, but its more secure doing so on your own secure device than on a card.
Apart from Express Pay (which only works on TfL services), it requires the use of a fingerprint or face. Both infinitely harder to break than a four digit pin which is as far as I can work out, is only a (1/10)^4 of guessing.
The risk at the minute appears to be from people snatching your phone from your hand while it's unlocked and draining bank accounts.
Supposedly if the phone is unlocked, it's easy to side load something that prevents it from locking again, then you can hack your way round the rest of the protections.
I am incredibly wary these days about how much of my life I am giving away if someone snatches my phone out of my hand, especially if unlocked.
Yep I’m very similar to you on this. Presumably the Apple Watch is a better bet then?
I'm not sure, as I don't own a digital watch. But I imagine it depends on whether or not apple pay is enabled as NFC when not directly paired with (ie within bluetooth range of) the iPhone in question.
Labour Manifesto Part 3 Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Create 650k jobs though Green industries.
Double onshore wind, triple solar panel, quadruple offshore win.
Will get Hinkley point c ‘over the line’ new nuclear stations will play a role.
Phased and ‘responsible’ transition in north sea. Not revoke existing licences. Oil and gas for decades to come.
Will close loopholes in the windfall tax – energy profits levy extended to end of next parliament.
Great British Energy Company – partner with industry and unions to deliver clean power – 8.3bn over 5 years.
Scotland to be powerhouse of clean energy mission
Tougher energy regulation
National wealth fund invest in ports, hydrogen, industrial clusters.
British hobs bonus to incentivize firms offering good conditions in marginals (note – actually they say industrial heartlands and coastal areas)
End injustice of mineworkers pension scheme (note – highly specific – what is the injustice?)
66.bn for energy efficiency.
A lot of vague stuff on accelerating net zero.
9 new national reiver walks, 3 new national forests
Water companies in special measures (note – not nationalise though)
Ban trail hunting and puppy smuggling.
Take back our streets
Violence is high, few criminals caught. Community policing has been downgraded, trust in police down, justice grinding to a halt.
‘Thousands’ of extra officers.
Hold ‘companies and executives cashing in on knife crime’ to account (note – I have no idea who is cashing in on this?)
New recruits paid for through efficiency (note – of course!)
Specific offence for assault on shopkeepers (note – why is a new law needed for this? – seems like a gimmick)
Ban ninja swords, zombie style blades.
Early intervention through pupil referral units and youth worker sin A & E.
Fast track rape cases, specialist courts at every crown court
New powers to intervene with failing forces.
Cut trial delays by allowing associate prosecutors to work on cases.
Tories failed to get prisons built – labour will use powers to build them
Hillsborough law
Lot of vague stuff on reducing reoffending and improving collaboration etc
Any more of this and I will publish a manifesto.
Ninja swords are already banned as are a range of knives that almost never get used for hurting people. Most stabbings are undertaken with moderate sized kitchen knives. The ones where the blade is a bit bigger than the handle.
Labour doc. through the door today…. can’t really call it a leaflet. A bit about the candidates views but nothing about her. It has got a bar chart, though, showing, probably correctly, that only the Labour candidate can beat the Tory.
Nothing from any of the others yet. Few Labour posters locally but no others. Positive Facebook post for Labour too. Makes me wonder about putting a small bet on Labour to oust Ms Patel.
National security – Labour founded NATO. ‘Set out path’ to 2.5% GDP on defence. Mentions Skripal poisoning (note – fair to say Corbyn would not have). Martyn’s Law to strengthen security at events. Police to have powers and resources they need (Note – no detail).
Secure borders – Conservatives only offer gimmicks. Rwanda cost hundreds of millions, and won’t work. Labour will go after gangs, new border security command, funded by ending Rwanda. New security agreement with EU. Clear asylum backlog. Fast track removals to safe countries.
Economic Stability – Tory mini budget was a disaster, country paying the price. Limits to what gov can spend, tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Chaos not over, Tories have unfunded tax cuts still.
Labour fiscal rule that current budget moves into balance, day to day costs met by revenues. Debt must be falling as share of economy by fifth year (Note – I guarantee this will not happen).
Families struggling. Energy costs will be reduced, food prices reduced. Expand childcare.. Free breakfast clubs in every primary school (note – I think everyone has promised this so far).
No NI increase, VAT increase, of basic, higher or additional income tax increase. Abolish non-dom status. Tackle tax avoidance.
Kickstart economic growth
Includes a pic of a café owner and ‘former conservative voter’.
New approach – securonomics (note – buzzwords are best words!)
New industrial strategy (note – LDs beat them to it)
National wealth fund 7.bn over 5 years
Money for ports, steel industry, gigfactories, green hydrogen
Stability through one fiscal event a year only.
25% corporation tax cap
Replace business rates – same revenue fairer way (note – what does this even mean?)
Bring railways into public ownership, new powers for local bus routes.
Short funding for R and D replaced with ten year budgets (note – if that was possible why aren’t we doing it now?)
Housing crisis – reform NPPF to restore mandatory housing targets (note – this is a good idea), strengthen presumption in favour of sustainable development. Fund additional planning officers through increasing stamp duty surcharge.
“Where necessary” Labour will use intervention powers to build houses we need (note – I don’t believe them, the first backbench rumbles will stop that).
Brownfield first, but not enough on its own (Note – my gods, this is actually a sensible point!) Release lower quality green belt land.
Widen devolution
New statutory local growth plans
Multi year funding settlements for local government.
Labour will reduce net migration – says reform the points based system to be fair (note – in what way?).
National jobs and careers service. Support disabled people into work. Work or apprenticeships for all those under 21.
Legislation on making work pay within 100 days
Minimum wage will be a living wage, but no details.
Whilst I support it, releasing “lower quality green belt” is not exactly a vote winner. That’s the first local elections lost.
Labour doc. through the door today…. can’t really call it a leaflet. A bit about the candidates views but nothing about her. It has got a bar chart, though, showing, probably correctly, that only the Labour candidate can beat the Tory.
Nothing from any of the others yet. Few Labour posters locally but no others. Positive Facebook post for Labour too. Makes me wonder about putting a small bet on Labour to oust Ms Patel.
I had Labour at door yetserday , asked if I considered voting Labour , I cahsed her. Told her given they were against independence they would get no vote from me.
I have a question for all you techies, which is a neat follow up to the Apple discussion.
I don’t currently use my Apple Watch for contactless payments on Apple Pay. Do you do so? If so, and in the words of Gandalf, "is it secret? Is it safe?”
Any advice / comments gratefully received.
xx
Not an Apple fan, I use Android, but yes I use contactless payments for ~99% of all my payments (Tesco pay@pump requires the use of a card annoyingly for the other 1%, Asda allows contactless at the pump). Though I normally use my phone more than my watch.
Its far safer than any other means of payment IMHO. And has no piddly £100 limit unlikely normal contactless so you can do big expenditures on it too, but its more secure doing so on your own secure device than on a card.
Apart from Express Pay (which only works on TfL services), it requires the use of a fingerprint or face. Both infinitely harder to break than a four digit pin which is as far as I can work out, is only a (1/10)^4 of guessing.
The risk at the minute appears to be from people snatching your phone from your hand while it's unlocked and draining bank accounts.
Supposedly if the phone is unlocked, it's easy to side load something that prevents it from locking again, then you can hack your way round the rest of the protections.
I am incredibly wary these days about how much of my life I am giving away if someone snatches my phone out of my hand, especially if unlocked.
Yep I’m very similar to you on this. Presumably the Apple Watch is a better bet then?
I'm not sure, as I don't own a digital watch. But I imagine it depends on whether or not apple pay is enabled as NFC when not directly paired with (ie within bluetooth range of) the iPhone in question.
The watch works entirely independently of the phone. You don’t even need your phone with you. It has its own sim.
Labour doc. through the door today…. can’t really call it a leaflet. A bit about the candidates views but nothing about her. It has got a bar chart, though, showing, probably correctly, that only the Labour candidate can beat the Tory.
Nothing from any of the others yet. Few Labour posters locally but no others. Positive Facebook post for Labour too. Makes me wonder about putting a small bet on Labour to oust Ms Patel.
I had Labour at door yetserday , asked if I considered voting Labour , I cahsed her. Told her given they were against independence they would get no vote from me.
I have a question for all you techies, which is a neat follow up to the Apple discussion.
I don’t currently use my Apple Watch for contactless payments on Apple Pay. Do you do so? If so, and in the words of Gandalf, "is it secret? Is it safe?”
Any advice / comments gratefully received.
xx
Apple Pay is way more secure than tapping a card. The ‘card’ number presented to the vendor changes every time with AP.
National security – Labour founded NATO. ‘Set out path’ to 2.5% GDP on defence. Mentions Skripal poisoning (note – fair to say Corbyn would not have). Martyn’s Law to strengthen security at events. Police to have powers and resources they need (Note – no detail).
Secure borders – Conservatives only offer gimmicks. Rwanda cost hundreds of millions, and won’t work. Labour will go after gangs, new border security command, funded by ending Rwanda. New security agreement with EU. Clear asylum backlog. Fast track removals to safe countries.
Economic Stability – Tory mini budget was a disaster, country paying the price. Limits to what gov can spend, tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Chaos not over, Tories have unfunded tax cuts still.
Labour fiscal rule that current budget moves into balance, day to day costs met by revenues. Debt must be falling as share of economy by fifth year (Note – I guarantee this will not happen).
Families struggling. Energy costs will be reduced, food prices reduced. Expand childcare.. Free breakfast clubs in every primary school (note – I think everyone has promised this so far).
No NI increase, VAT increase, of basic, higher or additional income tax increase. Abolish non-dom status. Tackle tax avoidance.
Kickstart economic growth
Includes a pic of a café owner and ‘former conservative voter’.
New approach – securonomics (note – buzzwords are best words!)
New industrial strategy (note – LDs beat them to it)
National wealth fund 7.bn over 5 years
Money for ports, steel industry, gigfactories, green hydrogen
Stability through one fiscal event a year only.
25% corporation tax cap
Replace business rates – same revenue fairer way (note – what does this even mean?)
Bring railways into public ownership, new powers for local bus routes.
Short funding for R and D replaced with ten year budgets (note – if that was possible why aren’t we doing it now?)
Housing crisis – reform NPPF to restore mandatory housing targets (note – this is a good idea), strengthen presumption in favour of sustainable development. Fund additional planning officers through increasing stamp duty surcharge.
“Where necessary” Labour will use intervention powers to build houses we need (note – I don’t believe them, the first backbench rumbles will stop that).
Brownfield first, but not enough on its own (Note – my gods, this is actually a sensible point!) Release lower quality green belt land.
Widen devolution
New statutory local growth plans
Multi year funding settlements for local government.
Labour will reduce net migration – says reform the points based system to be fair (note – in what way?).
National jobs and careers service. Support disabled people into work. Work or apprenticeships for all those under 21.
Legislation on making work pay within 100 days
Minimum wage will be a living wage, but no details.
WRT "Debt falling as % of economy by fifth year" the Economist, within the past couple of weeks notes something important, and scary:
While this is distant and ambitious, it's really worse than that. What 'by fifth year' means rolls forward by a year every 12 months. In other words in 2024 you have a paper plan to get there by 2029. In 2029 you have a paper plan to get there by 2034, and so on for ever. It isn't even slightly a plan to get out of impossible amounts of debt; and like the climate change CO2 plan, it intends to reduce debt by keeping on borrowing. Help.
Comments
Make Britain a clean energy superpower
- Create 650k jobs though Green industries.
- Double onshore wind, triple solar panel, quadruple offshore win.
- Will get Hinkley point c ‘over the line’ new nuclear stations will play a role.
- Phased and ‘responsible’ transition in north sea. Not revoke existing licences. Oil and gas for decades to come.
- Will close loopholes in the windfall tax – energy profits levy extended to end of next parliament.
- Great British Energy Company – partner with industry and unions to deliver clean power – 8.3bn over 5 years.
- Scotland to be powerhouse of clean energy mission
- Tougher energy regulation
- National wealth fund invest in ports, hydrogen, industrial clusters.
- British hobs bonus to incentivize firms offering good conditions in marginals (note – actually they say industrial heartlands and coastal areas)
- End injustice of mineworkers pension scheme (note – highly specific – what is the injustice?)
- 66.bn for energy efficiency.
- A lot of vague stuff on accelerating net zero.
- 9 new national reiver walks, 3 new national forests
- Water companies in special measures (note – not nationalise though)
- Ban trail hunting and puppy smuggling.
Take back our streetsI can't find anything beyond the pledges to leave corporation tax, income tax, VAT and NI rates unchanged. Is there anything else that I'm missing? I can't find anything that explicitly rules out rises in CGT, the introduction of wealth taxes, or reform of council tax, for example. There appears to be a plan to replace business rates and I'm wondering if the pledge to raise the same revenues in a different way might just shift into an opportunity to rinse the likes of Amazon for a lot more, little high street independents for a little less, and increase the net take?
Anyway, I suppose we'll find out in the Autumn whether Reeves is going to stick to the 'solving all our problems through growth alone' schtick, or deploy the 'OMG the books are even worse than we thought' excuse, and deploy a suite of tax hikes. We know perfectly well that if taxes aren't raised significantly and the promised boom fails to materialise PDQ, the no return to austerity pledge will end up in the dustbin.
As techie guys are team constantly gets into discussions with our it manager to explain why what he has asked for won't work....we constantly get told we are wrong and implement it as asked for and surprise surprise, sixth months later he is going why is this not working like I thought and we have to explain it to him again
Ninja swords are already banned as are a range of knives that almost never get used for hurting people. Most stabbings are undertaken with moderate sized kitchen knives. The ones where the blade is a bit bigger than the handle.
It has got a bar chart, though, showing, probably correctly, that only the Labour candidate can beat the Tory.
Nothing from any of the others yet. Few Labour posters locally but no others. Positive Facebook post for Labour too.
Makes me wonder about putting a small bet on Labour to oust Ms Patel.
While this is distant and ambitious, it's really worse than that. What 'by fifth year' means rolls forward by a year every 12 months. In other words in 2024 you have a paper plan to get there by 2029. In 2029 you have a paper plan to get there by 2034, and so on for ever. It isn't even slightly a plan to get out of impossible amounts of debt; and like the climate change CO2 plan, it intends to reduce debt by keeping on borrowing. Help.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68638865
"Government gets £420m from miners pension scheme"