I feel sorry for Armando Iannucci and satirists everywhere – politicalbetting.com

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Champagne sales slump due to lack of ‘celebration’ and joy in the world, industry execs say trib.al/S6Fp9Yq

https://x.com/nypost/status/1816551361476977006?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

We should all take a leaf out of Lily Bollinger’s book:

“I drink Champagne when I’m happy and when I’m sad. Sometimes I drink it when I’m alone. When I have company I consider it obligatory. I trifle with it if I’m not hungry and drink it when I am. Otherwise, I never touch it―unless I’m thirsty.”

Absurd price increases - one brand sold to a celebrity owner. Who doubled the prices….

moonshine said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

It’s extraordinary that we’re so far on and still haven’t built the sodding lower Thames crossing. Just toll it. And combine it with a far more expensive freight only toll on the existing route north from Dover.

One of the reasons big projects have cost so much in the UK is this constant second guessing. Delays and changes to important parts of the specification end up leading to mega fiascos like HS2.

For goodness sake, take a decision, and execute it, otherwise you spend money and get nothing. The Stonehenge project is already 50 years late!

Malmesbury said:

Leon said:

Tweedledee said:

Leon said:

Champagne sales slump due to lack of ‘celebration’ and joy in the world, industry execs say trib.al/S6Fp9Yq

https://x.com/nypost/status/1816551361476977006?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

In my case because cava and cremant are so reliable these days. There's nicer champagne obviously but for weekday drinking, codorniu hits the spot.

I’ve never had a nice cremant

I did, however, try some lovely MOLDOVAN sparkling wine on my recent visit there. A lot of places now make good fizz

I’ve had several. The smaller producers in Chablis and Mersault are realising that they have maxed out on the Grand and Premier Crus. The Petit Chablis is no longer any old turps - they are realising that they have vast acreage (relatively) for that and a small increase in quality commands bettter prices.

Similarly, cremant is getting more effort put in - again, it doesn’t use the premium terroir.

Had an ‘interesting’ blue sparkling wine from the Isle of Wight the other day. Wouldn’t spend what the purchaser did on it myself though, except to provide a talking point.

On topic, I can't help but be reminded of the claim that the great Tom Lehrer, one of the best satarists of all time, that “Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.”

Tweedledee said:

OldKingCole said:

eek said:

stodge said:

Afternoon all

We are getting the Silvertown Tunnel next year so that will add an extra crossing east of Tower Bridge.

Which doesn't really help people trying to get from Kent to Essex or vice versa...

Going South is usually straightforward, in my experience. Going North is the problem

Facilis descensus Averno.

Mind, one doesn’t want to go South of the River after dark!

Cicero said:

moonshine said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

It’s extraordinary that we’re so far on and still haven’t built the sodding lower Thames crossing. Just toll it. And combine it with a far more expensive freight only toll on the existing route north from Dover.

One of the reasons big projects have cost so much in the UK is this constant second guessing. Delays and changes to important parts of the specification end up leading to mega fiascos like HS2.

For goodness sake, take a decision, and execute it, otherwise you spend money and get nothing. The Stonehenge project is already 50 years late!

The Lower Thames Crossing has so far spent a quarter of a billion on paperwork.

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/lower-thames-crossing-applications-267m-cost-highlights-complexity-of-planning-system-06-12-2022/

MisterBedfordshire said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

That bird flew away when they made the A303 the trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).

If they’d have made the A30 the trunk road, they’d have to bypass Salisbury somewhere.

Theuniondivvie said:

Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.

Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.

https://x.com/Acyn/status/1817007890496102490

Unbelievable.

This is possibly the maddest idea that RFK Jnr has yet come up with.

Presidential Candidate RFK JR: "I will sign an executive order directing the US Treasury to purchase 550 Bitcoin daily until the US has built a reserve of at least 4,000,000 Bitcoins and a position of dominance that no other country will be able to usurp."
https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1816951410728317217

Sandpit said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

That bird flew away when they made the A303 the trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).

If they’d have made the A30 the trunk road, they’d have to bypass Salisbury somewhere.

That (and Yeovil, Shaftesbury etc) is basically why they detrunked the A30 in ~1958 and William Hanning built the New Direct Road from Andover to Honiton in ~1809 that became the A303; as the A30 route through Salisbury was such a goat track even in Georgian times that it delayed the stagecoaches.

The MoT had forgotten this by the time they came up with road numbers in 1923 and classified it as a bunch of B Roads before U turning and swiping the A303 number from next to Westminster Bridge in 1935.

(saved on signpost costs as most of the B Roads became A3036 in 1933 so they just had to paint out the "6" and paint in a "6" on the road off Westminster Bridge).

Chris said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.

Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.

https://x.com/Acyn/status/1817007890496102490

Unbelievable.

It's very believable.

‘Boris Johnson was in it for himself’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oe2QFQM4YGI

A controversial take aired on Times Radio by Simon Kuper, plugging his book Good Chaps.

williamglenn said:

https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1817204357466558666

NEW: A Tory MP says Priti Patel “is the Brat candidate" in the Tory leadership election

Boris Johnson is reportedly supporting her privately, with MPs across the party seeing her as both loyal and the candidate who can bring unity

#Priti4Leader

The Unity (Mitford) Candidate.

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

kamski said:

KnightOut said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.

https://x.com/lewisUTBdenison/status/1816503419743404219

'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?

Have you read any 20th century history?

Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.

We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.

In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.

It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.

History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.

Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism

Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.

Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.

Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.

The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.

The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.

If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.

kamski said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

Chris said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.

Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.

https://x.com/Acyn/status/1817007890496102490

Unbelievable.

It's very believable.

What's unbelievable is that people interpret such remarks as signalling a plan for a dictatorship.

When a 'normal' politician says something like "Never again will...", the implication is exactly the same but it doesn't cause any hysteria about the end of democracy.

Examples of things that are "exactly the same" as "it will be fixed... you won't have to vote again" please, or you're talking bollocks again

There are countless examples of legislation designed to tie the hands of future governments and lock in a particular direction of travel.

Nigelb said:

This is possibly the maddest idea that RFK Jnr has yet come up with.

Presidential Candidate RFK JR: "I will sign an executive order directing the US Treasury to purchase 550 Bitcoin daily until the US has built a reserve of at least 4,000,000 Bitcoins and a position of dominance that no other country will be able to usurp."
https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1816951410728317217

The US government could simply print the amount of dollars required to purchase the bitcoin.

Which explains in simple terms the difference between a currency with a limited supply and fixed inflation - say a gold backed one, or btc - and a fiat currency like the dollar.

For the record, I'd prefer a gold standard, but a btc backed currency would be better than the system we have now. See also https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

Chris said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.

Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.

https://x.com/Acyn/status/1817007890496102490

Unbelievable.

It's very believable.

What's unbelievable is that people interpret such remarks as signalling a plan for a dictatorship.

When a 'normal' politician says something like "Never again will...", the implication is exactly the same but it doesn't cause any hysteria about the end of democracy.

I don't think he meant it explicitly as a sign for dictatorship as people will take it, but your response is complacent in the extreme opposite direction, given his supporters at his urging tried to prevent a transfer of power once before. That makes any suggestions he or hints he might give in that direction dangerous.

People can complain about overegging the threat Trump poses to democracy all they want, it remains the case he is some level of threat to it by his own actions and words, and the retort is basically how dare people look at what happened and draw conclusions based on it.

williamglenn said:

https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1817204357466558666

NEW: A Tory MP says Priti Patel “is the Brat candidate" in the Tory leadership election

Boris Johnson is reportedly supporting her privately, with MPs across the party seeing her as both loyal and the candidate who can bring unity

Whichever Tory MP called her “the Brat candidate” needs to go away and hide their head in shame for the absolute cringe. Not only has “the Brat candidate” already been used about Kamala Harris, but by the actual creator of the “Brat” movement, Charlie xCX. So it’s not original or cool. Also the idea that Tories are down with the kids and all that is just so naff. They aren’t and shouldn’t be doing crap like that.

It’s also just waiting for Charlie xCX, ( young musicians not being particularly known for their appreciation of Tories, especially those Tories to the right of the party, ) to hammer the idea and the hijacking and then get loads and loads of young people ripping the shit out of the Tories.

It’s just tragic and I can see the face of the dickhead MP who said it being smiling away thinking they are cool and edgy because they know a “youth thing”.

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

BartholomewRoberts said:

kamski said:

KnightOut said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.

https://x.com/lewisUTBdenison/status/1816503419743404219

'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?

Have you read any 20th century history?

Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.

We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.

In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.

It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.

History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.

Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism

Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.

Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.

Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.

The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.

The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.

If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.

I accept the politics horseshoe theory of course but you have to stretch credibility a bit to claim Hitler was a left-winger.

Were the Nazis not fascists or are fascists not right-wing in your opinion?

Benpointer said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

kamski said:

KnightOut said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.

https://x.com/lewisUTBdenison/status/1816503419743404219

'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?

Have you read any 20th century history?

Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.

We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.

In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.

It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.

History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.

Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism

Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.

Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.

Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.

The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.

The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.

If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.

I accept the politics horseshoe theory of course but you have to stretch credibility a bit to claim Hitler was a left-winger.

I think the main takeaway from horseshoe theory is that left and right wing labels are at a certain point irrelevant, so for extreme cases it's pretty pointless apart from assessing their purported motivations (if sincere).

I'm baffled how many people still object to the idea mostly by pointing to the supposed goals of the left and right, ignoring the whole point is whatever they might claim they end up doing similar things..

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

I posted the other day about an idiot NIMBY who got caught dumping newts in a puddle on a planned construction site. Non native species and they all died…

Apparently it is really unfair that she is being looked at for prosecution.

Shades of the JustStopOil "Look at these middle class white people in cuddly sweaters, how could they deserve to go prison?" crowd, which always comes across as vaguely offensive to me.

The other bugbear with all these things in planning is that, of course, no amount of info or consultation is ever enough - it is just met with a) we don't trust the developers/experts b) there might be something if we look even more

Developers take the piss a lot in their own way, and I hate the way the public's default positions still make me side with the developers.

kle4 said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

Friend of mine has found newts have moved into her pond. Wondering about mowing the lawn now.

rottenborough said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

On topic, I can't help but be reminded of the claim that the great Tom Lehrer, one of the best satarists of all time, that “Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.”

And he is still alive iirc. Tom that is.

Yep. Well into his 90s by now. But what an amazing life.

williamglenn said:

kamski said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

Chris said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.

Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.

https://x.com/Acyn/status/1817007890496102490

Unbelievable.

It's very believable.

What's unbelievable is that people interpret such remarks as signalling a plan for a dictatorship.

When a 'normal' politician says something like "Never again will...", the implication is exactly the same but it doesn't cause any hysteria about the end of democracy.

Examples of things that are "exactly the same" as "it will be fixed... you won't have to vote again" please, or you're talking bollocks again

There are countless examples of legislation designed to tie the hands of future governments and lock in a particular direction of travel.

I'm sure, but they are not examples of politicians telling people "you won't have to vote again"

You aren't stupid, so please so stop being so disingenuous.

Of course you can interpret Trump's remarks in different ways. Maybe he meant "I'm not going to be on the ballot again so there's no point voting"

Richard_Tyndall said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).

If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.

I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.

The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.

It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.

Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?

(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)

kamski said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

kamski said:

KnightOut said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.

https://x.com/lewisUTBdenison/status/1816503419743404219

'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?

Have you read any 20th century history?

Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.

We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.

In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.

It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.

History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.

Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism

Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.

Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.

Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.

The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.

The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.

If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.

Hitler wasn't a socialist.

The rest of your post is equally moronic.

He even had the word Socialist in the Party Name.

If you want to see modern National Socialism in action, go to China.

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

If this means that balancing the books is being prioritised, then good.

England lead in the Test Match. No-one thought that likely last night.

Benpointer said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

kamski said:

KnightOut said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.

https://x.com/lewisUTBdenison/status/1816503419743404219

'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?

Have you read any 20th century history?

Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.

We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.

In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.

It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.

History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.

Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism

Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.

Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.

Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.

The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.

The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.

If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.

I accept the politics horseshoe theory of course but you have to stretch credibility a bit to claim Hitler was a left-winger.

Were the Nazis not fascists or are fascists not right-wing in your opinion?

The Nazis (and other Fascists) explicitly co-opted various pro-working class policies from socialism. Raising and maintaining workers standard of living was a major Nazi policy* - Hitler believed that it was critical to keeping national morale high. And that falling living standards had caused a part of the collapse in WWI.

See the various plans for mass holiday resorts, cheap cars for the masses, mandating better workplace conditions.

The also employed planned economy policies and state ownership and/or control of the “commanding heights” of the economy. Again, a major Nazi concept was that they would use socialist methods if that was what was needed in their view.

Something that is not often understood is that the Fascists hated free market economics. When they talked of the evils of capitalism, they were talking of stock markets and “high finance”. The Nazis then added in the idea that “high finance” was controlled by the Jews.

What they didn’t mind was big companies (such as Krupp) - as long as they made the products required by the state, used the raw materials from sources approved by the state, charged prices set by the state, employed those who the state wanted employed, had representatives of the state on the board. Oh, and paid bribes to all the right people in the state. Apart from that, big business was free to do what they wanted….

*yes, as with all totalitarian state polices, containing large quantity of lies and bullshit.

England somehow ahead, having been 115/5 this morning.

Theuniondivvie said:

‘You won’t like me when I’m angry!’

‘Don’t like you the rest of the time mate.’

To be fair, “Tommeh” got quite an impressive crowd into Trafalgar Sq. Normally it’s about 103 saddos with enormous beer guts

He’s claiming “100,000” and I rather doubt that - but it’s definitely a large crowd - tens of thousands?

Sandpit said:

England somehow ahead, having been 115/5 this morning.

Joint third in the Olympics medal table as well.

Malmesbury said:

Benpointer said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

kamski said:

KnightOut said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.

https://x.com/lewisUTBdenison/status/1816503419743404219

'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?

Have you read any 20th century history?

Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.

We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.

In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.

It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.

History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.

Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism

Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.

Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.

Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.

The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.

The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.

If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.

I accept the politics horseshoe theory of course but you have to stretch credibility a bit to claim Hitler was a left-winger.

Were the Nazis not fascists or are fascists not right-wing in your opinion?

The Nazis (and other Fascists) explicitly co-opted various pro-working class policies from socialism. Raising and maintaining workers standard of living was a major Nazi policy* - Hitler believed that it was critical to keeping national morale high. And that falling living standards had caused a part of the collapse in WWI.

See the various plans for mass holiday resorts, cheap cars for the masses, mandating better workplace conditions.

The also employed planned economy policies and state ownership and/or control of the “commanding heights” of the economy. Again, a major Nazi concept was that they would use socialist methods if that was what was needed in their view.

Something that is not often understood is that the Fascists hated free market economics. When they talked of the evils of capitalism, they were talking of stock markets and “high finance”. The Nazis then added in the idea that “high finance” was controlled by the Jews.

What they didn’t mind was big companies (such as Krupp) - as long as they made the products required by the state, used the raw materials from sources approved by the state, charged prices set by the state, employed those who the state wanted employed, had representatives of the state on the board. Oh, and paid bribes to all the right people in the state. Apart from that, big business was free to do what they wanted….

*yes, as with all totalitarian state polices, containing large quantity of lies and bullshit.

Yes, quite so. For Hitler liberal capitalism and the free market = England, America and, overall, the Jews

OldKingCole said:

kle4 said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

Friend of mine has found newts have moved into her pond. Wondering about mowing the lawn now.

Isn't this risking becoming the PB hate du jour? Only *one* species of newt is protected in the UK, the Great Crested Newt.

Newts are common, generally. Be surprised if they *didn't* move into a pond.

Carnyx said:

OldKingCole said:

kle4 said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

Friend of mine has found newts have moved into her pond. Wondering about mowing the lawn now.

Isn't this risking becoming the PB hate du jour? Only *one* species of newt is protected in the UK, the Great Crested Newt.

Newts are common, generally. Be surprised if they *didn't* move into a pond.

It's the people abusing the good name of the Great Crested Newt to protect some worthless scrubland or town adjacent field and pond I dislike!

Nigelb said:

.

JosiasJessop said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."

On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.

https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history-and-stories/first-world-war-aerodrome/

Just build a bloody road, as Richard says.
A tunnel is just daft; we're no longer living in a world of zero interest rates where our government borrowing was substantially below 100% of GDP.

The other issue is that Stonehenge Tunnel is ready to go with various enabling works underway already.

Change it and you have a decade of planning, design, legal challenges, equality impact assessments and about £300 million to pay for it before you turn a spade.

Carnyx said:

OldKingCole said:

kle4 said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

Friend of mine has found newts have moved into her pond. Wondering about mowing the lawn now.

Isn't this risking becoming the PB hate du jour? Only *one* species of newt is protected in the UK, the Great Crested Newt.

Newts are common, generally. Be surprised if they *didn't* move into a pond.

Yes; not entirely serious. Also I suspect my friend was looking for an excuse!

What is it with sports directors for tv who think we want to see nice shots of Paris or the crowd rather than the actual sport - especially as it comes to the end……

MisterBedfordshire said:

Nigelb said:

.

JosiasJessop said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."

On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.

https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history-and-stories/first-world-war-aerodrome/

Just build a bloody road, as Richard says.
A tunnel is just daft; we're no longer living in a world of zero interest rates where our government borrowing was substantially below 100% of GDP.

The other issue is that Stonehenge Tunnel is ready to go with various enabling works underway already.

Change it and you have a decade of planning, design, legal challenges, equality impact assessments and about £300 million to pay for it before you turn a spade.

This is one that I would not mind being gummed up and going nowhere for a decade or three, so crass is it.

OldKingCole said:

Carnyx said:

OldKingCole said:

kle4 said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

kle4 said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

another_richard said:

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Stonehenge Tunnel delayed - that's a project that really isn't needed.

The Lower Thames crossing just shows how much money we waste on planning for what should be a fait accompli. We've spent £300m on something that should that required £10m or so of work just to confirm the start and end points then kicked off the work...

Lawyers and consultants.

If they're not part of the solution they can be very lucratively part of the problem.

In fact its probably much easier and more lucrative to be part of the problem.

Yep - the fix has to be finding a method that allow strategically important developments to be implemented quickly without 10 years of legal arguments first.

Parliament is sovereign. It should be possible for a Bill to be passed for a significant piece of infrastructure, and for the project to actually start within weeks. Set compulsory purchase orders at 150% or even 200% of prior market value.

The problem isn’t the compulsory purchase. It’s the requirement for rather vaguely defined statutory obligations to be considered. Which can then be challenged and taken to court.

And the number of vague duties and obligations is set to increase, is it not?

Yes - because they have no immediate cost to the people adding them in. Virtue signalling.

So you need to do a massive report on the effects of building low cost housing on equality before you can build it.

And climate change, nutrient deficiency, bats, newts and so on...

I have come to hate bats and newts with a passion. Not their fault, but the way NIMBY's co-opt them to their cause is infuriating.

Naturally, if assessments prove no newts or bats or mitigations can provide for them, their disagreement with a proposal curiously does not lessen, almost as though it's a pretext.

Friend of mine has found newts have moved into her pond. Wondering about mowing the lawn now.

Isn't this risking becoming the PB hate du jour? Only *one* species of newt is protected in the UK, the Great Crested Newt.

Newts are common, generally. Be surprised if they *didn't* move into a pond.

Yes; not entirely serious. Also I suspect my friend was looking for an excuse!

Friend of mine had his young children move newts into the ponds on his side-field when they were under-10, and 25 years later wanted to build his retirement house on it !

They did, but there were a lot of requirements such as newt-fences.

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Nigelb said:

.

JosiasJessop said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."

On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.

https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history-and-stories/first-world-war-aerodrome/

Just build a bloody road, as Richard says.
A tunnel is just daft; we're no longer living in a world of zero interest rates where our government borrowing was substantially below 100% of GDP.

The other issue is that Stonehenge Tunnel is ready to go with various enabling works underway already.

Change it and you have a decade of planning, design, legal challenges, equality impact assessments and about £300 million to pay for it before you turn a spade.

It's too expensive - and it's too close to Stonehenge - I'm more than happy for it to be delayed and redesigned..

Have you seen where the A303 is currently?

Just get it done ffs.

eek said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Nigelb said:

.

JosiasJessop said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."

On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.

https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history-and-stories/first-world-war-aerodrome/

Just build a bloody road, as Richard says.
A tunnel is just daft; we're no longer living in a world of zero interest rates where our government borrowing was substantially below 100% of GDP.

The other issue is that Stonehenge Tunnel is ready to go with various enabling works underway already.

Change it and you have a decade of planning, design, legal challenges, equality impact assessments and about £300 million to pay for it before you turn a spade.

It's too expensive - and it's too close to Stonehenge - I'm more than happy for it to be delayed and redesigned..

Well you have to either dual the A303 or build the tunnel. It was one of the country’s biggest bottlenecks two decades ago.

Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?

solarflare said:

Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?

Probably.

Richard_Tyndall said:

JosiasJessop said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Sandpit said:

A good day to bury bad news?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/27/rachel-reeves-delay-flagship-hospital-road-building/

Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects
Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance

Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.

Afternoon everyone!

For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.

Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.

Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.

That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).

If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.

I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.

The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.

It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.

Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?

(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)

To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.

And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.

'Priceless' ?

English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...

But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.

And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...

(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...

Andy_JS said:

Smith goes for 95.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/live/c0kk0wgw059t#Scorecard

I wonder if Gus Atkinson is quietly pleased with that ball...