|
|
Post by andrew111 on Nov 22, 2016 19:26:24 GMT
I can't speak for Liverpool, but it wasn't just slum housing which went in Glasgow though - many of the old tenements, and townhouses went with the slums (to say nothing of the old schools, churches, town halls, etc...) Our current house was condemned during the 1970s - they demolished down the road but never got round to this block. Restored in the 1980s by Housing Association, perfectly habitable today. A number of blocks could have been saved in Gorbals and Govan (not all of them, there were some slums, its not a binary fact), but there wasn't the will beyond mass demolition. Don't have the numbers to hand, but from memory there was a deficit in terms of "slums" demolished to "new houses" built by several thousand, exacerbated by the high rise issue of course. A lot of slum clearance was carried out not because the houses were in particularly bad condition or not suited for installing basic facilities. It was often down to issues like the road layout that made them unsuitable for improvement. Hence a lot of tenements and terraces were demolished for this reason. There were many mistakes made, particularly in London, but is is wrong to say that all demolition was wrong. The assumptions made was that the problems of the major Cities was down to overcrowding and dispersal was required. In order to preserve the spatial structure and protect the Green Belt, this was done by building New Towns. This strategy proved so successful in its stated terms that within 25 years the main problem facing the main Cities had become depopulation. At the point the New Town programme was halted and funds diverted into Inner City renewal. It was not easy to achieve this. Building Societies used to routinely 'red line' all City Centres and would not lend money on any property within that area. Builders were loath to develop brownfield sites because of the cost of remediation. There as a lot of consumer resistance to living in the City Centre. Most wanted to move to the suburbs or to smaller towns or villages. It took a lot of work, particularly by the Thatcher administration to try and overcome the above attitudes and institutional barriers In many places it is alleged that slums were demolished to make money for developers and certain local councillors. Some of the houses that replaced them have already been demolished, they were so badly built... |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 13, 2017 22:18:08 GMT
ITV news tonight did not seem to be aware of this by-election! Only Leigh mentioned in context of mayoral elections. And Saturday's Grauniad mentions only the other three.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jan 14, 2017 16:47:29 GMT
ITV news tonight did not seem to be aware of this by-election! Only Leigh mentioned in context of mayoral elections. And Saturday's Grauniad mentions only the other three. Because outside of Liverpool, no one cares about Liverpool? |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 15, 2017 9:56:36 GMT
ITV news tonight did not seem to be aware of this by-election! Only Leigh mentioned in context of mayoral elections. And Saturday's Grauniad mentions only the other three. Because outside of Liverpool, no one cares about Liverpool? Got a mention by Andrew Rawnsley in Observer today. |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Jan 15, 2017 10:07:13 GMT
ITV news tonight did not seem to be aware of this by-election! Only Leigh mentioned in context of mayoral elections. And Saturday's Grauniad mentions only the other three. Because outside of Liverpool, no one cares about Liverpool? Because Labour's gonna win it bigly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2017 12:42:52 GMT
ITV news tonight did not seem to be aware of this by-election! Only Leigh mentioned in context of mayoral elections. And Saturday's Grauniad mentions only the other three. Because outside of Liverpool, no one cares about Liverpool? That is similar to the current NI situation, London and Dublin dont give a flying. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jan 16, 2017 14:20:56 GMT
Because outside of Liverpool, no one cares about Liverpool? That is similar to the current NI situation, London and Dublin dont give a flying. Pretty much! |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Jan 16, 2017 16:42:43 GMT
Because outside of Liverpool, no one cares about Liverpool? That is similar to the current NI situation, London and Dublin dont give a flying. That's because most Ulster politics involves trying to bilk cash out of London or Dublin, so nothing is new. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2017 19:15:49 GMT
That is similar to the current NI situation, London and Dublin dont give a flying. That's because most Ulster politics involves trying to bilk cash out of London or Dublin, so nothing is new. Thats what politics has descended into throughout the British isles |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2017 14:02:07 GMT
Why should the Conservatives care about Liverpool or the greater Liverpool area. In a mercantilistic sense it just doesn't gain them anything by focusing on the Liverpool area. And, if you know you're hated by a certain group (Scousers) why waste time trying to evangelise.
"The propagandist canalises an existing stream: in a land where there is no water, he digs in vain" - Aldous Huxley
|
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Feb 2, 2017 13:16:39 GMT
Why should the Conservatives care about Liverpool or the greater Liverpool area. In a mercantilistic sense it just doesn't gain them anything by focusing on the Liverpool area. And, if you know you're hated by a certain group (Scousers) why waste time trying to evangelise. "The propagandist canalises an existing stream: in a land where there is no water, he digs in vain" - Aldous Huxley As someone who has lived their lives in areas where labour are wholly dominant (Worsley and Eccles south, where I currently live, is the only area I lived in with any significant conservative vote), I have to disagree with this. The other areas I have lived in are county durham and, yes, liverpool. Yes in FPTP parties are going to concentrate on where they can win, but the wholesale abandonment of conservative supporters in areas completely dominated by labour makes the polarisation of politics even worse (and vice verss for labour supporters in areas where the conservatives dominate). Being on the opposing end to overwhelming majorities for labour where I live, in some cases with a plurality rather than a majority of votes, has made me sympathetic to electoral reform, at least at a local government level. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 2, 2017 17:06:23 GMT
To add to what thirdchill has said- democracy requires as many views to be represented as there are people willing to stand and represent them. Or to put it another way- the major centre-right party has a duty to provide a centre-right option for voters across the whole country, whether they live in Old Sarum or Old Swan. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Feb 3, 2017 16:00:27 GMT
And if you don't speak to your natural supporters in areas where you can't win, you forget how to talk to swing voters in areas where you can win (or who those swing voters are.) I would certainly say that Labour's worsening performance in small working-class towns in the south over the past couple of decades has had ramifications more serious than just slightly greater Tory majorities on rural district councils.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 3, 2017 16:34:02 GMT
And if you don't speak to your natural supporters in areas where you can't win, you forget how to talk to swing voters in areas where you can win (or who those swing voters are.) That's exactly why I kept slogging away in Brightside, plus to ensure people knew we were around. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,692
|
Post by mboy on Feb 3, 2017 16:41:35 GMT
And if you don't speak to your natural supporters in areas where you can't win, you forget how to talk to swing voters in areas where you can win (or who those swing voters are.) I would certainly say that Labour's worsening performance in small working-class towns in the south over the past couple of decades has had ramifications more serious than just slightly greater Tory majorities on rural district councils. One of the key flaws of FPTP is that it heaps such great importance on to such small demographics in a sub-set of seats, and leads to distorted priorities such as this... |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,419
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 3, 2017 17:57:37 GMT
Why should the Conservatives care about Liverpool or the greater Liverpool area. In a mercantilistic sense it just doesn't gain them anything by focusing on the Liverpool area. And, if you know you're hated by a certain group (Scousers) why waste time trying to evangelise. "The propagandist canalises an existing stream: in a land where there is no water, he digs in vain" - Aldous Huxley As someone who has lived their lives in areas where labour are wholly dominant (Worsley and Eccles south, where I currently live, is the only area I lived in with any significant conservative vote), I have to disagree with this. The other areas I have lived in are county durham and, yes, liverpool. Yes in FPTP parties are going to concentrate on where they can win, but the wholesale abandonment of conservative supporters in areas completely dominated by labour makes the polarisation of politics even worse (and vice verss for labour supporters in areas where the conservatives dominate). Being on the opposing end to overwhelming majorities for labour where I live, in some cases with a plurality rather than a majority of votes, has made me sympathetic to electoral reform, at least at a local government level. I can relate to that. I cureently live in a very safe Labour seat. Before the boundary changes I was in a marginal. I was brought up in two monolitihically safe Conservative seats It certainly encourages both non-voting and tactical voting as well - voting for the party best placed to defeal the dominant force I actually want some hung parliaments as its the only thing likely to convince the two big parties that we need change - they cling on to the current system because they perceive it can give them a majority (on a minority of votes and low turnouts....) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2017 18:09:50 GMT
Why should the Conservatives care about Liverpool or the greater Liverpool area. In a mercantilistic sense it just doesn't gain them anything by focusing on the Liverpool area. And, if you know you're hated by a certain group (Scousers) why waste time trying to evangelise. "The propagandist canalises an existing stream: in a land where there is no water, he digs in vain" - Aldous Huxley As someone who has lived their lives in areas where labour are wholly dominant (Worsley and Eccles south, where I currently live, is the only area I lived in with any significant conservative vote), I have to disagree with this. The other areas I have lived in are county durham and, yes, liverpool. Yes in FPTP parties are going to concentrate on where they can win, but the wholesale abandonment of conservative supporters in areas completely dominated by labour makes the polarisation of politics even worse (and vice verss for labour supporters in areas where the conservatives dominate). Being on the opposing end to overwhelming majorities for labour where I live, in some cases with a plurality rather than a majority of votes, has made me sympathetic to electoral reform, at least at a local government level. If we had STV in local elections the Conservatives would do a lot more in Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield etc. There are wards in these cities I think they'd win seats in with STV: Dore & Totley and Stocksbridge & Upper Don in Sheffield Church and Woolton in Liverpool Brooklands and Didsbury West in Manchester |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 3, 2017 19:34:18 GMT
If we had STV in local elections the Conservatives would do a lot more in Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield etc. There are wards in these cities I think they'd win seats in with STV: Dore & Totley and Stocksbridge & Upper Don in Sheffield Church and Woolton in Liverpool Brooklands and Didsbury West in Manchester The Conservatives used to do very well in the south-east link, but High Command's eye was always on Hallam. With STV I'd certainly expect them to get a handful of seats around there. Nowadays the strong-second-placers have been replaced by UKIP link. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 3, 2017 23:01:54 GMT
And on Manchester, remember its boundaries are extremely tightly drawn and look quite odd.
Though I suspect Didsbury is lost to the Tories for a long time. The natural Tory voters' kids are moving or have moved out towards the Heatons, Cheadle or Sale. That movement, which mirrors past ones, is what keeps the Conservative Party vibrant in Trafford and competitive in Stockport despite it all.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,419
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 4, 2017 9:53:39 GMT
There are many areas in the south where Labour have enough votes to win some council seats with a more proportional system.
Actuaslly, despite doing better overall from a change, I think the LibDems might actually do less well in some of those areas as they do benefit from tactical voting
|
|
