Monday 2nd March 2015
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.
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.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 8:29 am
- Location: Being rained on in west Wales
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Labour Women's Network Political Day
Manchester 28 Feb 2015
Peoples History Museum
It was rainy, cold & after hours together, listening & talking to each others' concerns, stories & work, getting on board the Women's Campaign bus to campaign in the afternoon required inspiration.
Rt Hon Angela Eagle, Labour MP for Wallasey, Shadow Leader of the House, provided the inspiration.
"I'm getting on the pink bus!"
said CitizenJA, with my comrades in the audience.
It was good.
It's hard work.
If we've got a problem, we're going to have to get in there & talk with each other, allowing our comrades the chance to show us their thinking, allowing them to educate us about what we don't know.
Don't be afraid of your people.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
This article from the BBC doesn't put a figure on how much money to local councils will be lost but it does make clear who will be most affected:yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
This suggests that the obligations being waived are the ones that currently help to fund new social housing, although that's only a guess on my part.The Conservatives are proposing to relax the obligations expected of developers in relation to affordable housing, believing this will give them more flexibility about the make-up of new developments and make more brownfield sites viable for development.
But the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations in England, said this would reduce financial support for cheaper rented housing.
"It is basically taking money away from people who are renting and giving it to first-time buyers," Henry Gregg told the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31683974
Edited to add that this would fit a long standing pattern for the Tory party. I've long been of the opinion that the bedroom tax was more about attacking the financial viability of social housing than it was about attacking benefit recipients.
Last edited by Willow904 on Mon 02 Mar, 2015 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 8:29 am
- Location: Being rained on in west Wales
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Thanks Willow.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Faisal Islam @faisalislam
The parliament about to end will be by far the worst on record for housebuilding....
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The parliament about to end will be by far the worst on record for housebuilding....
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Hi Fedup59 and welcomefedup59 wrote:AnatolyKasparov wrote:In reply to Robert and ephe - I'm not happy about this either. At all.
(and you know what a loyalist I normally am, so I don't say such a thing lightly)
But I'm buggered if I'm going to let it deflect me from the fact this coming GE is one of the most important of my lifetime. I still have confidence in the likes of Miliband and Burnham, and both hope and expect that they will turn this dog's breakfast into something that we can at least live with.
Get a Tory-based government again in two months, then that is the end of the NHS as we have known it. And the welfare state more generally. Not to mention the United Kingdom itself.
The stakes are that high.
Hello all - long time reading but not logged in - for lots of generally miserable reasons. Anyway this is more a comment on the general unhappiness about Manchester than a specific reply to anyone. Surely any discussions about devolving power/ budgets or anything else anywhere in England have to be part and parcel of the constitutional convention or whatever it will be called that Labour intend to have in relation to devolution in England. I know more about Scotland than Wales, but the devolution settlements were not back of a fag packet nor a response to George Osborne's election manipulation but discussed, consulted on and decided over a reasonable period of time. How else can we have a NHS with both political and professional boundaries and responsibilities that makes sense and protects a whole population provision realistically? I'd really like Labour to say they will deal with any internal issues this might have thrown up but that they refuse to be dragged into short term political posturing about something that is essential to all of us living in the UK. To me this is about how devolution should not fragment national commitments but live within the constraints they require.
This whole Manchester situation "seems" to have been done behind closed doors (not the devo bit, that's been openly discussed for a long time and was signed in November).
The problems started late last Tuesday night when it was leaked that Manchester would take over provision for NHS services as well. The way that was done is the murky bit, well explained in the Tribune and Simon Jenkins articles I linked to last night.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
AS blog:Willow904 wrote:This article from the BBC doesn't put a figure on how much money to local councils will be lost but it does make clear who will be most affected:yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
This suggests that the obligations being waived are the ones that currently help to fund new social housing, although that's only a guess on my part.The Conservatives are proposing to relax the obligations expected of developers in relation to affordable housing, believing this will give them more flexibility about the make-up of new developments and make more brownfield sites viable for development.
But the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations in England, said this would reduce financial support for cheaper rented housing.
"It is basically taking money away from people who are renting and giving it to first-time buyers," Henry Gregg told the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31683974
Edited to add that this would fit a long standing pattern for the Tory party. I've long been of the opinion that the bedroom tax was more about attacking the financial viability of social housing than it was about attacking benefit recipients.
(my bold)Cameron's Q&A
Cameron is now taking questions.
Q: How will your starter home policy be funded?
This policy will work, says Cameron, because developers and builders are saying they will deliver it.
They can offer a discount because some of the regulatory costs will be cut, he says, such as section 106 agreements.
So there you have it plebs - if you can't/won't buy a house, you can live your lives homeless & penniless because frankly my dear, I don't give a flying fuck.
LOL Dave
mwah mwah to the wealthy, two-fingers to the rest of you.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 8:29 am
- Location: Being rained on in west Wales
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Am posting this because I know we have some aviation fans on FTN.
The report now out refers to an incident last year.
I'm further south than the Machynlleth loop but we get our fair share of Typhoons and Hawks [& US planes in the past] whizzing down our valleys so it is a little worrying.
RAF jets worth £300m in near miss at 1,000mph in skies above Mid Wales
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... re-8749526" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The report now out refers to an incident last year.
I'm further south than the Machynlleth loop but we get our fair share of Typhoons and Hawks [& US planes in the past] whizzing down our valleys so it is a little worrying.
RAF jets worth £300m in near miss at 1,000mph in skies above Mid Wales
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... re-8749526" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
The planning fee for 2 new dwelling is £1155.00 (I used 2 because any more and other details are needed to calculate.yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/PpForm ... ormServlet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:49 am
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
And the Tartan Tories jump on the bandwagon:pk1 wrote:AS blog:Willow904 wrote:This article from the BBC doesn't put a figure on how much money to local councils will be lost but it does make clear who will be most affected:yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
This suggests that the obligations being waived are the ones that currently help to fund new social housing, although that's only a guess on my part.The Conservatives are proposing to relax the obligations expected of developers in relation to affordable housing, believing this will give them more flexibility about the make-up of new developments and make more brownfield sites viable for development.
But the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations in England, said this would reduce financial support for cheaper rented housing.
"It is basically taking money away from people who are renting and giving it to first-time buyers," Henry Gregg told the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31683974
Edited to add that this would fit a long standing pattern for the Tory party. I've long been of the opinion that the bedroom tax was more about attacking the financial viability of social housing than it was about attacking benefit recipients.
(my bold)Cameron's Q&A
Cameron is now taking questions.
Q: How will your starter home policy be funded?
This policy will work, says Cameron, because developers and builders are saying they will deliver it.
They can offer a discount because some of the regulatory costs will be cut, he says, such as section 106 agreements.
So there you have it plebs - if you can't/won't buy a house, you can live your lives homeless & penniless because frankly my dear, I don't give a flying fuck.
LOL Dave
mwah mwah to the wealthy, two-fingers to the rest of you.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3706017NICOLA Sturgeon has unveiled a £70 million scheme to help low and moderate income families in Scotland buy their first homes.
Under the plan eligible buyers will receive an interest free loan to help them get on the property ladder.
Anybody would think there was an election in the offing.
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
FFS!They can offer a discount because some of the regulatory costs will be cut, he says, such as section 106 agreements.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
Legislation Planning obligations under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), commonly known as s106 agreements, are a mechanism which make a development proposal acceptable in planning terms, that would not otherwise be acceptable. They are focused on site specific mitigation of the impact of development. S106 agreements are often referred to as 'developer contributions' along with highway contributions and the Community Infrastructure Levy.
http://www.pas.gov.uk/3-community-infra ... 01/ARTICLE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Removing the bedroom tax would go a long way to sorting the lack of homes problem as many 3 bed houses across the country are laying empty as people cannot afford to rent them.
This is from last July and will only have got worse
"The numbers of empty homes we've got to let are increasing significantly," says Iain Sim, chief executive of Coast and Country.
"People are now telling us that because of bedroom tax, they can no longer afford to move into the bigger family homes, and as a consequence of that we're getting fewer lettings and more empty houses."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23122369" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This is from last July and will only have got worse
"The numbers of empty homes we've got to let are increasing significantly," says Iain Sim, chief executive of Coast and Country.
"People are now telling us that because of bedroom tax, they can no longer afford to move into the bigger family homes, and as a consequence of that we're getting fewer lettings and more empty houses."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23122369" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... ut-to-deve" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;In return for offering the discount, developers no longer have to pay for the new infrastructure to support this new housing, including schools, hospitals, roads and flood defences. This infrastructure still needs to be paid for of course, it's just that developers are no longer the ones paying for it.
Developers will also be stripped of the need to sign section 106 agreements. These agreements oblige developers to either provide new affordable homes, school places or other contributions to the local area.
Again, these new services will still need to be paid for, it's just that developers will no longer be the ones paying for them. So instead of landowners and developers paying for new affordable homes and school places out of their profits, the cost will fall entirely on local councils and taxpayers.
....
Under the proposals, developers will also be stripped of the requirement to make developments zero carbon. This will have the dubious benefit of allowing developers to build less energy efficient and poorer quality homes. Whichever way you look at it, this amounts to yet another windfall for developers.
Indeed the closer you look at the policy, the clearer it becomes that this is a straight up transfer of wealth from the public sector to the private and from local people to landowners, rather than a genuine attempt to provide new homes.
Last edited by pk1 on Mon 02 Mar, 2015 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
A local development has already had the 106 agreement waived, just to get a brownfield site redeveloped. Councils have practically been throwing money at housebuilders to achieve even the pitiful levels of builds we have already. (Remember Gordon Brown's sweetners to get house building going again after the crash). I seriously doubt if Cameron's plan will have any effect on house build numbers at all, even if you generously accept he is doing it for the right reasons.pk1 wrote:AS blog:Willow904 wrote:This article from the BBC doesn't put a figure on how much money to local councils will be lost but it does make clear who will be most affected:yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
This suggests that the obligations being waived are the ones that currently help to fund new social housing, although that's only a guess on my part.The Conservatives are proposing to relax the obligations expected of developers in relation to affordable housing, believing this will give them more flexibility about the make-up of new developments and make more brownfield sites viable for development.
But the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations in England, said this would reduce financial support for cheaper rented housing.
"It is basically taking money away from people who are renting and giving it to first-time buyers," Henry Gregg told the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31683974
Edited to add that this would fit a long standing pattern for the Tory party. I've long been of the opinion that the bedroom tax was more about attacking the financial viability of social housing than it was about attacking benefit recipients.
(my bold)Cameron's Q&A
Cameron is now taking questions.
Q: How will your starter home policy be funded?
This policy will work, says Cameron, because developers and builders are saying they will deliver it.
They can offer a discount because some of the regulatory costs will be cut, he says, such as section 106 agreements.
So there you have it plebs - if you can't/won't buy a house, you can live your lives homeless & penniless because frankly my dear, I don't give a flying fuck.
LOL Dave
mwah mwah to the wealthy, two-fingers to the rest of you.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Can't find the airprox report. It is a bit of risk gone mad, low risk of collision but multiplied up the severity list by value of assets - according to the Mirror.yahyah wrote:Am posting this because I know we have some aviation fans on FTN.
The report now out refers to an incident last year.
I'm further south than the Machynlleth loop but we get our fair share of Typhoons and Hawks [& US planes in the past] whizzing down our valleys so it is a little worrying.
RAF jets worth £300m in near miss at 1,000mph in skies above Mid Wales
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... re-8749526" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
However looking at this it is clear an accident is inevitable at some point. No TCAS in the Typhoon because of cost cutting.
http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-554595.html
Release the Guardvarks.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Cameron & his government have had almost five years to get houses built.
Instead three bedroom dwellings are standing empty because of the Bedroom Tax.
Instead three bedroom dwellings are standing empty because of the Bedroom Tax.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Welcome, Fedup59!fedup59 wrote:AnatolyKasparov wrote:In reply to Robert and ephe - I'm not happy about this either. At all.
(and you know what a loyalist I normally am, so I don't say such a thing lightly)
But I'm buggered if I'm going to let it deflect me from the fact this coming GE is one of the most important of my lifetime. I still have confidence in the likes of Miliband and Burnham, and both hope and expect that they will turn this dog's breakfast into something that we can at least live with.
Get a Tory-based government again in two months, then that is the end of the NHS as we have known it. And the welfare state more generally. Not to mention the United Kingdom itself.
The stakes are that high.
Hello all - long time reading but not logged in - for lots of generally miserable reasons. Anyway this is more a comment on the general unhappiness about Manchester than a specific reply to anyone. Surely any discussions about devolving power/ budgets or anything else anywhere in England have to be part and parcel of the constitutional convention or whatever it will be called that Labour intend to have in relation to devolution in England. I know more about Scotland than Wales, but the devolution settlements were not back of a fag packet nor a response to George Osborne's election manipulation but discussed, consulted on and decided over a reasonable period of time. How else can we have a NHS with both political and professional boundaries and responsibilities that makes sense and protects a whole population provision realistically? I'd really like Labour to say they will deal with any internal issues this might have thrown up but that they refuse to be dragged into short term political posturing about something that is essential to all of us living in the UK. To me this is about how devolution should not fragment national commitments but live within the constraints they require.
I've eaten all the Welsh cakes & chocolate.
Don't tell anyone it was me.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
More from AS blog:
The rates are exactly the same (0.5%) as they were in 2010 you utter moron !!
They will keep interest rates low will they ? Nothing to do with the Bank of England then ?Cameron says the Tories are making five pledges on housing.
First, they will keep interest rates low, he says.
Risible !The government is managing the economy properly. That is why interest rates are low.
If you compare rates now with what they were in 2010, the saving on a £120,000 loan is worth £155 per month, he says.
The rates are exactly the same (0.5%) as they were in 2010 you utter moron !!
-
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:49 am
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Don't suppose he's mentioned interest rates for people with savings? (in the UK, not Switzerland or the Channel Islands).pk1 wrote:More from AS blog:
They will keep interest rates low will they ? Nothing to do with the Bank of England then ?Cameron says the Tories are making five pledges on housing.
First, they will keep interest rates low, he says.
Risible !The government is managing the economy properly. That is why interest rates are low.
If you compare rates now with what they were in 2010, the saving on a £120,000 loan is worth £155 per month, he says.
The rates are exactly the same (0.5%) as they were in 2010 you utter moron !!
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
From AS blog [scroll down to last paragraph in link boundary]Public sector workers across Northern Ireland are to stage a 24-hour strike in a dispute over budget cuts and jobs. As the Press Association reports, members of the GMB union working in education, the civil service, transport, the Rivers Agency, Forestry Service and Environment Agency will walk out on March 13. Other unions are believed to be considering joining the strike.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... 0f7be317c1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Sarah Champion MP @SarahChampionMP · 4 mins4 minutes ago
Education questions about to start in the chamber.
Education questions about to start in the chamber.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
AnatolyKasparov wrote:In reply to Robert and ephe - I'm not happy about this either. At all.
(and you know what a loyalist I normally am, so I don't say such a thing lightly)
But I'm buggered if I'm going to let it deflect me from the fact this coming GE is one of the most important of my lifetime. I still have confidence in the likes of Miliband and Burnham, and both hope and expect that they will turn this dog's breakfast into something that we can at least live with.
Get a Tory-based government again in two months, then that is the end of the NHS as we have known it. And the welfare state more generally. Not to mention the United Kingdom itself.
The stakes are that high.
I agree that the stakes are that high, Anatoly.
I doubt I would survive another 5 years with IDS taking my ability to live away.
But - I am repeatedly disappointed by Labour one day, then cheering them on the next. The YourBritain consultation was a bit of a sham, and I'm not the only person who thinks that. We hear a good speech, Miliband scores points and PMQs, it's all looking good....then something happens or a non-announcement announcement is made and I could scream with frustration.
I've done my fair share (more, actually, considering how poorly I am these days) of campaigning and trudging around delivering leaflets etc. etc. and that without this work and all the people who do it we could end up under the Tory cosh again.
It's not enough to say "wait and see" or "Labour have to be careful" yadda yadda yadda. The nonsense in Manchester is a case in point, and how any Labour politician of whatever seniority in local or national government can sign up to what is proposed is beyond me.
As I said, I can swallow the general uselessness of Reeves and Green as I appreciate that for most people (if not for me and a few others) social security is not that pressing a problem; but I can't let this one go without making my opinion heard.
Robert is absolutely right on this - if this goes ahead, it's the end of the NHS as a national concern. The Yorkshire Post has an article about how it could work in Leeds; speculative, but if Manchester do it other will want their slice of the action too.
This is what Osborne knows - many politicians will jettison any principles they have in the pursuit of more power or the illusion of it.
I am heartily sick of the lack of courage in so many of our politicians, including those I want to vote for. Just when I think Labour are doing something brave, they slip back into anodyne soundbites clearly designed to avoid frightening the ponies.
If they are going to sit on the fence like this for the rest of the campaign, they wont win. They're not giving me anything to get behind.
It feels like there's no fight in them and no passion.
Citizen JA - thank you for the PM.
HindleA - not having a pop at you personally.
Sometimes it is difficult here because of the way any criticism of Labour gets jumped on.
We have been here many times before.
That's why I take a break periodically, and that's why some people just leave.
I'm taking a break now.
Play nicely.
"Poverty is the worst form of violence" - Mahatma Gandhi
-
- Home Secretary
- Posts: 1767
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
- Location: Neath Valley.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Sat on the train going to London, the wonderful Michael Sheen has got on, after giving a rocket of a speech I feel like being all star struck and going up to him.
But I won't, shy like that.
But I won't, shy like that.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Did you hear the speech ? For those that haven't:letsskiptotheleft wrote:Sat on the train going to London, the wonderful Michael Sheen has got on, after giving a rocket of a speech I feel like being all star struck and going up to him.
But I won't, shy like that.
[youtube]qHgqAtmXuHU[/youtube]
Last edited by pk1 on Mon 02 Mar, 2015 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Interesting (and encouraging) article. I recommend taking a gander.Would it be realistic to renationalise the railways? (BBC News website)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31621300
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Hmmm, interesting.....Matthew Oakeshott was campaigning in Hove for Labour at the weekend.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jacob Kahane
@JacobKahane
More great teams out this afternoon for @TeamPeterKyle @peterkyle. Thanks to @oakeshottm for joining us
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jacob Kahane
@JacobKahane
More great teams out this afternoon for @TeamPeterKyle @peterkyle. Thanks to @oakeshottm for joining us
Last edited by pk1 on Mon 02 Mar, 2015 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- 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: Monday 2nd March 2015
I read, somewhere, that the savings on price would come from builders/developers having average fees of £45,000 L.A. fees per plot waived. Sorry I can't remember where I read that.yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8331
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:27 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Thanks for this ephemerid and come back soon pleaseephemerid wrote:AnatolyKasparov wrote:In reply to Robert and ephe - I'm not happy about this either. At all.
(and you know what a loyalist I normally am, so I don't say such a thing lightly)
But I'm buggered if I'm going to let it deflect me from the fact this coming GE is one of the most important of my lifetime. I still have confidence in the likes of Miliband and Burnham, and both hope and expect that they will turn this dog's breakfast into something that we can at least live with.
Get a Tory-based government again in two months, then that is the end of the NHS as we have known it. And the welfare state more generally. Not to mention the United Kingdom itself.
The stakes are that high.
I agree that the stakes are that high, Anatoly.
I doubt I would survive another 5 years with IDS taking my ability to live away.
But - I am repeatedly disappointed by Labour one day, then cheering them on the next. The YourBritain consultation was a bit of a sham, and I'm not the only person who thinks that. We hear a good speech, Miliband scores points and PMQs, it's all looking good....then something happens or a non-announcement announcement is made and I could scream with frustration.
I've done my fair share (more, actually, considering how poorly I am these days) of campaigning and trudging around delivering leaflets etc. etc. and that without this work and all the people who do it we could end up under the Tory cosh again.
It's not enough to say "wait and see" or "Labour have to be careful" yadda yadda yadda. The nonsense in Manchester is a case in point, and how any Labour politician of whatever seniority in local or national government can sign up to what is proposed is beyond me.
As I said, I can swallow the general uselessness of Reeves and Green as I appreciate that for most people (if not for me and a few others) social security is not that pressing a problem; but I can't let this one go without making my opinion heard.
Robert is absolutely right on this - if this goes ahead, it's the end of the NHS as a national concern. The Yorkshire Post has an article about how it could work in Leeds; speculative, but if Manchester do it other will want their slice of the action too.
This is what Osborne knows - many politicians will jettison any principles they have in the pursuit of more power or the illusion of it.
I am heartily sick of the lack of courage in so many of our politicians, including those I want to vote for. Just when I think Labour are doing something brave, they slip back into anodyne soundbites clearly designed to avoid frightening the ponies.
If they are going to sit on the fence like this for the rest of the campaign, they wont win. They're not giving me anything to get behind.
It feels like there's no fight in them and no passion.
Citizen JA - thank you for the PM.
HindleA - not having a pop at you personally.
Sometimes it is difficult here because of the way any criticism of Labour gets jumped on.
We have been here many times before.
That's why I take a break periodically, and that's why some people just leave.
I'm taking a break now.
Play nicely.
We do end up here often don't we? I think people also feel jumped on (not by anyone in particular) for supporting Labour.
I think the important thing (addressed at us all) is for us to focus on the political points and not the person making them.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago
CON moves from 4% deficit in Ashcroft phone poll to 3% lead
CON 34 +2
LAB 31 -5
LD 7 =
UKIP 14+3
GRN 7 -1
CON moves from 4% deficit in Ashcroft phone poll to 3% lead
CON 34 +2
LAB 31 -5
LD 7 =
UKIP 14+3
GRN 7 -1
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8331
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:27 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
His polls are like a bloody seesaw aren't they?pk1 wrote:Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago
CON moves from 4% deficit in Ashcroft phone poll to 3% lead
CON 34 +2
LAB 31 -5
LD 7 =
UKIP 14+3
GRN 7 -1
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
1. Very small sample sizes.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:His polls are like a bloody seesaw aren't they?pk1 wrote:Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago
CON moves from 4% deficit in Ashcroft phone poll to 3% lead
CON 34 +2
LAB 31 -5
LD 7 =
UKIP 14+3
GRN 7 -1
2. Different companies = different assumptions.
He is polling for headlines not accuracy.
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- First Secretary of State
- Posts: 3725
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Tiny sample sizes. If it hadn't been weighted the Conservatives lead appears huge given the 'class' numbers.TechnicalEphemera wrote:1. Very small sample sizes.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:His polls are like a bloody seesaw aren't they?pk1 wrote:Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago
CON moves from 4% deficit in Ashcroft phone poll to 3% lead
CON 34 +2
LAB 31 -5
LD 7 =
UKIP 14+3
GRN 7 -1
2. Different companies = different assumptions.
He is polling for headlines not accuracy.
-
- First Secretary of State
- Posts: 3725
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
My favourite part of the LAP is the spin he applies in his summary. Always raises a chuckle.StephenDolan wrote:Tiny sample sizes. If it hadn't been weighted the Conservatives lead appears huge given the 'class' numbers.TechnicalEphemera wrote:1. Very small sample sizes.PaulfromYorkshire wrote: His polls are like a bloody seesaw aren't they?
2. Different companies = different assumptions.
He is polling for headlines not accuracy.
- ErnstRemarx
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
- Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Hello fedup59, and a warm welcome to FTN. And many thanks for a bloody excellent first post.fedup59 wrote:AnatolyKasparov wrote:In reply to Robert and ephe - I'm not happy about this either. At all.
(and you know what a loyalist I normally am, so I don't say such a thing lightly)
But I'm buggered if I'm going to let it deflect me from the fact this coming GE is one of the most important of my lifetime. I still have confidence in the likes of Miliband and Burnham, and both hope and expect that they will turn this dog's breakfast into something that we can at least live with.
Get a Tory-based government again in two months, then that is the end of the NHS as we have known it. And the welfare state more generally. Not to mention the United Kingdom itself.
The stakes are that high.
Hello all - long time reading but not logged in - for lots of generally miserable reasons. Anyway this is more a comment on the general unhappiness about Manchester than a specific reply to anyone. Surely any discussions about devolving power/ budgets or anything else anywhere in England have to be part and parcel of the constitutional convention or whatever it will be called that Labour intend to have in relation to devolution in England. I know more about Scotland than Wales, but the devolution settlements were not back of a fag packet nor a response to George Osborne's election manipulation but discussed, consulted on and decided over a reasonable period of time. How else can we have a NHS with both political and professional boundaries and responsibilities that makes sense and protects a whole population provision realistically? I'd really like Labour to say they will deal with any internal issues this might have thrown up but that they refuse to be dragged into short term political posturing about something that is essential to all of us living in the UK. To me this is about how devolution should not fragment national commitments but live within the constraints they require.
- ErnstRemarx
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
- Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
It depends if they're talking about Section 106 money or the actual Planning Department fees. If it's the former, they're already being undermined by Osborne and Pickles in order to curry favour with developers; if it's the latter, then income fromthe departments everywhere will collapse and heap further severe strain on councils everywhere.yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
In other words it's a rubbish policy that will further harm local councils when they're already under massive strains. Or, in other words, it's a pile of unworkable shit that will be practically impossible to implement.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Like all Tory policies the only thing it will be successful in doing will be funneling money to their friends and supporters. Like the pointless killing of badgers that's really a bung to Tory voting farmers or free schools which is just a policy to give school deeds to their mates, most Tory policies achieve their real aim, it's just the real aim is rarely the stated one.ErnstRemarx wrote:It depends if they're talking about Section 106 money or the actual Planning Department fees. If it's the former, they're already being undermined by Osborne and Pickles in order to curry favour with developers; if it's the latter, then income fromthe departments everywhere will collapse and heap further severe strain on councils everywhere.yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
In other words it's a rubbish policy that will further harm local councils when they're already under massive strains. Or, in other words, it's a pile of unworkable shit that will be practically impossible to implement.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
- ErnstRemarx
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
- Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
As I suspected, it's a full on attack on S106 - the one thing that brings social conscience to developers. In short, it's a levy (generally negotiated) on planning applications that involve housing. The bigger the development, the higher the levy, whilst a proportion of 'affordable' housing is required for site - this again is negotiable. On sites with 15 or fewer dwellings S106 doesn't apply, which encourages builders to concentrate on larger, high unit value buildings, which benefits only the developer (this was brought in by the Tories).Willow904 wrote:This article from the BBC doesn't put a figure on how much money to local councils will be lost but it does make clear who will be most affected:yahyah wrote:Has anyone seen an estimate of how much money local councils would lose as a result of Cameron's plan to give young first time buyers a 20% discount ?
Radio 4 said the money would come from savings the builders would make by not having to pay [as they do currently] fees to the local authority.
Am I misunderstanding it [as usual]....this means money will be lost to councils so there will be a loss to the public purse.
This suggests that the obligations being waived are the ones that currently help to fund new social housing, although that's only a guess on my part.The Conservatives are proposing to relax the obligations expected of developers in relation to affordable housing, believing this will give them more flexibility about the make-up of new developments and make more brownfield sites viable for development.
But the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations in England, said this would reduce financial support for cheaper rented housing.
"It is basically taking money away from people who are renting and giving it to first-time buyers," Henry Gregg told the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31683974
Edited to add that this would fit a long standing pattern for the Tory party. I've long been of the opinion that the bedroom tax was more about attacking the financial viability of social housing than it was about attacking benefit recipients.
In practice, sites that are costly to remediate due to past pollution and so forth generally generate a lower profit than greenfield ones - which is why housebuilders like the latter. If they can persuade the planners that they can't build at an adequate profit, then the affordable housing/S106 stuff is arrived at by negotiation and by conditioning of the approval, and I've seen a fair few examples where this has applied, usually always with the Bellways and so forth of the world.
Kick away the prop of S106 money and the need to produce 'affordable' housing, and at a stroke it'll reduce the amount of starter homes available, as well as screwing over our parks and other facilities that rely on S106 funding (and we're talking hundreds of thousands of pounds here). The only beneficiaries will be the developer who'll make a lot more money, and the Tory party, who'll probably receive a slice of it.
- ErnstRemarx
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
- Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Predictable. And predicted at the time. Why would you take on a house only to be walloped by the bedroom tax? Answer: you don't bother.AngryAsWell wrote:Removing the bedroom tax would go a long way to sorting the lack of homes problem as many 3 bed houses across the country are laying empty as people cannot afford to rent them.
This is from last July and will only have got worse
"The numbers of empty homes we've got to let are increasing significantly," says Iain Sim, chief executive of Coast and Country.
"People are now telling us that because of bedroom tax, they can no longer afford to move into the bigger family homes, and as a consequence of that we're getting fewer lettings and more empty houses."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23122369" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- ErnstRemarx
- Secretary of State
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
- Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
The article and first comment on it lay out the weapons grade stupidity of the proposal. It's so colossally stupid that Shapps and CMD must have been up all night thinking of how to fuck up LAs and the housing market any further.pk1 wrote:http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... ut-to-deve" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;In return for offering the discount, developers no longer have to pay for the new infrastructure to support this new housing, including schools, hospitals, roads and flood defences. This infrastructure still needs to be paid for of course, it's just that developers are no longer the ones paying for it.
Developers will also be stripped of the need to sign section 106 agreements. These agreements oblige developers to either provide new affordable homes, school places or other contributions to the local area.
Again, these new services will still need to be paid for, it's just that developers will no longer be the ones paying for them. So instead of landowners and developers paying for new affordable homes and school places out of their profits, the cost will fall entirely on local councils and taxpayers.
....
Under the proposals, developers will also be stripped of the requirement to make developments zero carbon. This will have the dubious benefit of allowing developers to build less energy efficient and poorer quality homes. Whichever way you look at it, this amounts to yet another windfall for developers.
Indeed the closer you look at the policy, the clearer it becomes that this is a straight up transfer of wealth from the public sector to the private and from local people to landowners, rather than a genuine attempt to provide new homes.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
How can we protect ourselves from fear in order to act in the best interests of ourselves, family, friends & country?
-
- Backbencher
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:12 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Good Evening everyone.
Not really sure of the FTN protocol for PM'ing, so........
Ernst. Would you mind if I PM'd you with a question please?
Kind Regards.
Not really sure of the FTN protocol for PM'ing, so........
Ernst. Would you mind if I PM'd you with a question please?
Kind Regards.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
I recommend a large number of specially trained guard Aardvarks.citizenJA wrote:How can we protect ourselves from fear in order to act in the best interests of ourselves, family, friends & country?
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 8:29 am
- Location: Being rained on in west Wales
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Did anyone else hear the amazingly gentle BBC interview with Prof McWilliams on PM ?
I almost wondered if the interviewer was his daughter she was so easy on him.
I almost wondered if the interviewer was his daughter she was so easy on him.
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Is anyone else as uninterested as I am in what Mohammed Emwazi's Nan had for breakfast? By comparison, I'm riveted by the reportage of William's trip to China in spite of the absence of Mrs William and the offspring (who are, nevertheless, very much in the thoughts of the BBC).
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
TechnicalEphemera wrote:Can't find the airprox report. It is a bit of risk gone mad, low risk of collision but multiplied up the severity list by value of assets - according to the Mirror.yahyah wrote:Am posting this because I know we have some aviation fans on FTN.
The report now out refers to an incident last year.
I'm further south than the Machynlleth loop but we get our fair share of Typhoons and Hawks [& US planes in the past] whizzing down our valleys so it is a little worrying.
RAF jets worth £300m in near miss at 1,000mph in skies above Mid Wales
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... re-8749526" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
However looking at this it is clear an accident is inevitable at some point. No TCAS in the Typhoon because of cost cutting.
http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-554595.html
Report here.
http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/2014154.pdf
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- Minister of State
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Thu 12 Feb, 2015 6:16 pm
- Location: Labour-Liberal marginal
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
That speech hit so many nails on the head we're going to need a new hammer. Powerful stuff.pk1 wrote:Did you hear the speech ? For those that haven't:letsskiptotheleft wrote:Sat on the train going to London, the wonderful Michael Sheen has got on, after giving a rocket of a speech I feel like being all star struck and going up to him.
But I won't, shy like that.
[youtube]qHgqAtmXuHU[/youtube]
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
The whole thing is bollocks.PorFavor wrote:Is anyone else as uninterested as I am in what Mohammed Emwazi's Nan had for breakfast? By comparison, I'm riveted by the reportage of William's trip to China in spite of the absence of Mrs William and the offspring (who are, nevertheless, very much in the thoughts of the BBC).
Who cares about one homicidal muppet, hardly relevant in the grand scheme of things.
But it distracts from the real issues, and Dave gets to pretend to be hard.
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 8:29 am
- Location: Being rained on in west Wales
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
For those who missed it Sheen's programme from South Wales 'walking in the footsteps of the Chartists' is well worth watching on i-player
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0547tsj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0547tsj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Just sat through ITV news, waiting for their coverage of the Oxford child sexual abuse report.
When they mentioned 10 arrests I was pleasantly surprised but then they followed that up with "in Rochdale"
Oxford ? Not. A. Single. Word !
This is our glorious free press.......
When they mentioned 10 arrests I was pleasantly surprised but then they followed that up with "in Rochdale"
Oxford ? Not. A. Single. Word !
This is our glorious free press.......
- rebeccariots2
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 14038
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm
Re: Monday 2nd March 2015
Chris Williamson @ChriswMP 37m37 minutes ago
Great work by RSPCA & Derbys Police sees badger killing thugs get 3 month jail. Foxhunters should face same penalty http://www.derbyshiretimes.co.uk/news/c ... unstone-1-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Working on the wild side.