Wednesday 15th April

A home from home
Forum rules
Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
gilsey
Prime Minister
Posts: 6173
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 10:51 am

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by gilsey »

I thought there was a right-to-buy on HA homes, but the discounts are small so it's not often used.
One world, like it or not - John Martyn
Tubby Isaacs
Prime Minister
Posts: 9949
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:18 pm

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by Tubby Isaacs »

Ah look- she bought it auction. So not the same thing at all.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by citizenJA »

Goodnight, everyone.
love
cJA
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by rebeccariots2 »

Karl Turner retweeted
Ally Fogg ‏@AllyFogg 29m29 minutes ago
Times: DPP to announce it would 'not be in the public interest' to prosecute Lord(Greville) Janner despite testimony from 20 alleged victims
Working on the wild side.
gilsey
Prime Minister
Posts: 6173
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 10:51 am

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by gilsey »

RogerOThornhill wrote:Has anyone audited this £21bn of welfare (sic) cuts that Cameron keeps banking on about?
Well we -FTN- certainly discussed it recently.
The tories baseline is a projection for 'welfare' spending made 5 years ago, the 21bn saving is measured against that. It's not an actual reduction in spending.

We certainly have lower unemployment and lower inflation than would have been in the forecast. How much of that the coalition should take credit for is another matter.
One world, like it or not - John Martyn
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by ErnstRemarx »

TechnicalEphemera wrote:This is an outrage.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 79718.html

We simply no longer live in a democracy.

The fact the Greens are going along with this charade is also shocking. Bennett (Australian) colluding with two politicians who want to break up the UK.

Meanwhile the BBC gives the Tories a free shot in the interests of balance.
Fucking outrageous. OK, I demand to turn up at a Tory only meeting to slag the fuckers off and insist that the meeja cover my comments. That sounds fair.
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by ErnstRemarx »

This really is rather good:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/132278863@N02/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm pretty sure that Mr. Kantor won't mind much more publicity. I'm already a fan.
User avatar
RogerOThornhill
Prime Minister
Posts: 11115
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by RogerOThornhill »

I do marvel at the gall of free school defenders...like this one. The author is the chair of governors at the (very) selective 6th form in Newham - London School of Excellence.

https://news.tes.co.uk/b/opinion/2015/0 ... hools.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Although they are trying to draw a political dividing line, Labour’s manifesto suggests to me that they and their Tory opponents disagree on the detail rather than the principle of encouraging new schools run by new providers. Surely it is possible to have a sensible debate on things like the weighting given to different types of ‘need’ for a new school without decrying the work and achievements of the teachers, parents, charities and schools that created these 400 new schools?

I would also suggest that Labour think again about the support that groups might need if they truly want to attract the most innovative school providers. Of the genuinely ‘new’ providers that get through the rigorous application process to set up a new school, most will have worked with the advice charity New Schools Network – those applying without this help struggle to navigate the red tape and fall at the first hurdle. If we want new, innovative schools to succeed, they are going need support from an independent body to give them the best possible start.
Barnaby Lenon - where have I seen that name before?

http://www.newschoolsnetwork.org/about- ... naby-lenon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, you're a trustee of New Schools Network?

I guess that slipped your mind when you wrote that puff piece then...independent body my arse.
If I'm not here, then I'll be in the library. Or the other library.
User avatar
LadyCentauria
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2437
Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by LadyCentauria »

Tubby Isaacs wrote:In my old firm, they used to phone up people in other countries fairly often for advice.

I don't recall that making people liable for British tax.
Same here.
Image
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by ErnstRemarx »

RogerOThornhill wrote:I do marvel at the gall of free school defenders...like this one. The author is the chair of governors at the (very) selective 6th form in Newham - London School of Excellence.

https://news.tes.co.uk/b/opinion/2015/0 ... hools.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Although they are trying to draw a political dividing line, Labour’s manifesto suggests to me that they and their Tory opponents disagree on the detail rather than the principle of encouraging new schools run by new providers. Surely it is possible to have a sensible debate on things like the weighting given to different types of ‘need’ for a new school without decrying the work and achievements of the teachers, parents, charities and schools that created these 400 new schools?

I would also suggest that Labour think again about the support that groups might need if they truly want to attract the most innovative school providers. Of the genuinely ‘new’ providers that get through the rigorous application process to set up a new school, most will have worked with the advice charity New Schools Network – those applying without this help struggle to navigate the red tape and fall at the first hurdle. If we want new, innovative schools to succeed, they are going need support from an independent body to give them the best possible start.
Barnaby Lenon - where have I seen that name before?

http://www.newschoolsnetwork.org/about- ... naby-lenon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, you're a trustee of New Schools Network?

I guess that slipped your mind when you wrote that puff piece then...independent body my arse.
Cracking spot - worth a tweet if possible. Massive chutzpah.
User avatar
LadyCentauria
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2437
Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by LadyCentauria »

AngryAsWell wrote:SUN FRONT PAGE: "We DO have two kitchens...nanny uses the one downstairs" #skypapers

(Having a nanny is better than leaving the kids in the pub I think)

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And way better than having nannies and still leaving the kids in the pub...
Image
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
User avatar
RogerOThornhill
Prime Minister
Posts: 11115
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by RogerOThornhill »

The Times is reporting that Greville Janner won't be charged over historic sex abuse claims - not in the public interest apparently.

A veteran Labour politician is to escape charges for the second time over alleged child sex crimes in a decision that will prompt anger at prosecutors and claims of an establishment cover-up. Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions, will announce today that it would not be in the public interest to put on trial Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC, the former MP for Leicester West, for historical abuse allegations. Crown Prosecution Service lawyers have spent nine months studying volumes of evidence gathered by Leicestershire police’s Operation Enamel, while detectives have interviewed more than 20 men who claim that they were abused by Lord Janner in their youth. Last night police officers were visiting the alleged victims in person to inform them of the decision not to proceed with the case. Lord Janner, 86, who strongly denied the allegations against him when they surfaced 20 years ago, has not been interviewed by detectives because of poor health but police obtained warrants…

Not sure what you can say about this - maybe the evidence just isn't strong enough or is it just because he's too infirm to stand trial?
If I'm not here, then I'll be in the library. Or the other library.
User avatar
TechnicalEphemera
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by TechnicalEphemera »

RogerOThornhill wrote:The Times is reporting that Greville Janner won't be charged over historic sex abuse claims - not in the public interest apparently.

A veteran Labour politician is to escape charges for the second time over alleged child sex crimes in a decision that will prompt anger at prosecutors and claims of an establishment cover-up. Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions, will announce today that it would not be in the public interest to put on trial Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC, the former MP for Leicester West, for historical abuse allegations. Crown Prosecution Service lawyers have spent nine months studying volumes of evidence gathered by Leicestershire police’s Operation Enamel, while detectives have interviewed more than 20 men who claim that they were abused by Lord Janner in their youth. Last night police officers were visiting the alleged victims in person to inform them of the decision not to proceed with the case. Lord Janner, 86, who strongly denied the allegations against him when they surfaced 20 years ago, has not been interviewed by detectives because of poor health but police obtained warrants…

Not sure what you can say about this - maybe the evidence just isn't strong enough or is it just because he's too infirm to stand trial?
Probably a bit of both, but who knows. I can't imagine that the CPS took this decision lightly.
Release the Guardvarks.
User avatar
LadyCentauria
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2437
Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by LadyCentauria »

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Image

This is interesting, seeing the HA homes she's objecting to have never had right to buy before.

Going to be an ex-council place, transferred to an HA, isn't it? These have always had the right to buy, haven't they?
Council tenants would have qualified for RTB but whose properties were transferred to a HA have a Preserved-Right To Buy. Not newer tenants. However, if the HA is willing, properties that were built in 1997 or later can qualify for a Right To Acquire, subject also to length of tenancy as set by the HA. RTA attracts a lower discount, usually between £16,000 and £35,000. Some HAs sell Shared Ownerships in properties they've built themselves; and some build properties which they sell at 'Affordable' prices, or even, occasionally, full market-value.

It's possible that the HA was wanting to shed their own properties and gave her first refusal or a move – depending on how they're constituted an HA/Housing Company might do this to fund new builds. Or, she might have bought through RTA, or any of the other mechanisms. But I don't think she had a Council Tenancy in her own right, ever, so it wasn't through RTB or P-RTB.
Image
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
User avatar
LadyCentauria
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2437
Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by LadyCentauria »

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Ah look- she bought it auction. So not the same thing at all.
So, on the open market – which is a perfectly legitimate way for an HA to sell and for any member of the public to purchase if they can pay.
Image
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
User avatar
51A
Committee Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri 19 Sep, 2014 8:06 pm
Location: South Wales

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by 51A »

gilsey wrote:I thought there was a right-to-buy on HA homes, but the discounts are small so it's not often used.
So the tories will make the discounts massive and those who got HA homes because they were in dire need but whose circumstances have improved because they got decent and secure housing will take advantage. Pull the ladder up from those behind them who will be next in dire need. It's disgusting. I am just hoping it won't work too well because a lot who still need those homes still need those homes because they're still not out of the mire the housing boom/bust bubble puts a lot of us into at times. Or perhaps they'll just have enough of a conscience to know it's not the right thing to do. It's a vile idea. We need homes for those that suddenly lose theirs. A massive amount of former social housing is now in the hands of spiv landlords charging a hundred or 2 a month more than the social tenants next door pay for a less well maintained home. This was never a good idea, does Cameron think he can make people feel richer by stealing the assets of our "big society"?
User avatar
LadyCentauria
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2437
Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by LadyCentauria »

ErnstRemarx wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:This is an outrage.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 79718.html

We simply no longer live in a democracy.

The fact the Greens are going along with this charade is also shocking. Bennett (Australian) colluding with two politicians who want to break up the UK.

Meanwhile the BBC gives the Tories a free shot in the interests of balance.
Fucking outrageous. OK, I demand to turn up at a Tory only meeting to slag the fuckers off and insist that the meeja cover my comments. That sounds fair.
Shall we have a Board Outing? We are New Media, after all!
Image
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
User avatar
51A
Committee Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri 19 Sep, 2014 8:06 pm
Location: South Wales

Re: Wednesday 15th April

Post by 51A »

I am not going to "quote" anyone because I simply cannot bear to see the "Mail" banner here. But we have to wonder why any former home built for social housing reasons is now worth £1million. The property bubble is so out of control as to make home ownership beyond the dreams of our kids and they won't get affordable rented housing if it's all sold. That was never a good policy. To inflate it again and again without building new homes in both sectors is so far beyond stupid I just despair!
Locked