maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Jun 15, 2021 21:29:47 GMT
Absolutely right. within a mile of my home there are two digger ready development sites. One is a huge Homes England site, which has been available for housing (from memory) for about 4 years. Nothing happened so far apart from clearance. And when it does there will be far too little socially rented housing on it - which is what we desperately need here. Another site in my ward has had planning permission for 50 homes for around 5 years. No sign of anything happening. The problem is absolutely not lack of sites with planning approval, its developer land banking and the lack of public investment to build socially rented housing to replace the huge numbers of council homes lost to right to buy. In Birmingham we typically lose 600 or so a year to right to buy, lose another 150 or so to demolition (that number varies a lot but its typical) and build maybe just enough socially rented housing to cover the loss to demolition - but we don't even start to cover those lost to right to buy. The Homes England site should have been built literally years ago, instead it sits idle while thousands of Brummies live in inappropriate temporary housing. That is the scandal we should be shouting about.
This argument has been around for at least 30 years and it as wrong now as it was then.
I'm not a huge fan of 'Right to Buy' as a policy in and of itself, but what it meant was that for every purchase, there was one fewer family in social rented housing. If every home that was sold off was replaced by more social housing, then it wouldn't actually achieve anything, you'd just have a handful of lucky people who got to buy a property on the cheap.
To my mind the policy only had value if it meant that the overall level of social housing could be steadily reduced - ideally reaching an end point where there was no social housing at all. Why the fuck should the state be involved at all in where (some) people live anyway? It's needlessly authoritarian and unnecessarily divisive.
The real question we should be asking is: Why? Why should it be thus? How did we get here? Why should it accepted that a certain proportion of the population - including some fairly rich people - should live in housing owned and run and managed by local government and civil servants?
But nobody even wants to have the conversation. Too much self-interest.
Well, the conversation isn't happening because everybody, except free market absolutists like you and Richard, knows that developpers cannot be trusted to build what is needed. Low supply means high selling prices and developpers build what is bringing them the highest margins, not what the market needs.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Jun 11, 2021 21:53:26 GMT
Which, from experience amounts to "Conservatives are more likely to lie to pollsters about their views"
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on May 29, 2021 22:15:28 GMT
relique , I was aware of the villages that lived on despite being destroyed, but had no idea that they still had mayors. Is this well-known still in France? Well-known, I couldn't say, but I remember when I was taught in school about the first world war, I think there was a chapter on the "devoir de mémoire", and the teacher talked about it. A correction about Val-d'Oise. They didn't came close to win it in 2011, they actually lost it (only council gained by the right in 2011).
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on May 28, 2021 0:48:46 GMT
In Greater Manchester not only are there two roads with the same name, they connect to each other, not only that, but there are two houses with the same number NEXT DOOR TO EACH OTHER! linkI presume you’re dealing with two councils? Part of the legal agreement at Federation finally completed in 1910 bans identical road names, so there were a number of Victoria Roads renamed, along with things like Station Road; a wall outside Fenton Health Centre still has “Station Road” in Minton tiles embedded in it despite the road being Glebedale Road for almost 122 years. Yes, in the case exposed on that website, it's about 443 Manchester Road in Bolton (BL4) being next door to 443 Manchester Road in Salford (M27).
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on May 1, 2021 14:17:44 GMT
I can confirm I'm not behind this, nor do I know the man behind this project.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 30, 2021 21:40:53 GMT
Not that surprising. She was demoted from DCCC chair after the disappointing House results, and perhaps she's decided there's no longer a future for her in the gerontocracy. Given that the gerontocracy is in its last couple of years I doubt it. More likely she suspects her already competitive Trump District will become more so post-redistricting when Illinois loses a District and she doesn’t want a loss on her record. She’s mentioned in her retirement announcement she wants to consider how best she can serve the people of Illinois in the future, in which case it may be worth noting that Jesse White, the Secretary of State since 1999, turns 87 in June so should be on anyone’s retirement list. She is quite disliked by her collegues who blame her bad targeting and choices for almost losing the House. She is quite unlikely in the House leadership to have a future no matter what.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 30, 2021 15:15:03 GMT
She is leaving the party because she has thrown a strop over being removed as leader. Her claims to the contrary are self serving and obviously nonsense. She has been removed as leader because the sabre-rattling extremists wanting war against the Catholics took over.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 29, 2021 16:21:43 GMT
At times, a frustrating and inaccurate piece. Firstly, they note that the Brexit party aren't standing, without acknowledging that Reform are. Secondly, they refer to London, Bristol and Manchester as "affluent cities", which is a frustrating generalisation; in turn, failing to recognise that Labour voters in these cities come from a broad socio-economic base. And, thirdly, Starmer's removal of "hard left" members from his shadow cabinet was not just because of his crackdown on antisemitism. I can’t believe the comment about Manchester being an affluent city. Maybe certain redeveloped parts of the city centre, and perhaps Didsbury, but the whole east of the city is desperately deprived. Blackly and Wythenshawe aren’t too bad but are far from affluent. That's becuase that not information, that's anti-left propaganda.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 24, 2021 17:47:18 GMT
Well, it is still disturbing, especially since it has been privatised. What stops them to censor leaflets that major shareholders don't like? i would think the problem would be the 'court of public opinion" rather than shareholders. Here, Canada Post still delivers graphic anti-abortion leaflets and the repugnant Epoch Times (far-right Falun Gong newspaper/litter) despite widespread compalints by both receivers and mail carriers, saying they are not allowed to censor mail unless mandated by court order.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 24, 2021 16:52:42 GMT
That's extremely concerning. The Royal Mail isn't a censor. The Royal Mail has had rules as to what is acceptable content for since I have been dealing with General Elections (first stood as candidate in 1983) and almost certainly before. Although prior to the point at which they allowed unaddressed leaflets or leaflets not in envelopes they were unable to check. (which I think is after 1983) Well, it is still disturbing, especially since it has been privatised. What stops them to censor leaflets that major shareholders don't like?
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 24, 2021 16:17:04 GMT
But overall it is an interesting illustration of the limits to throwing money at elections. The same spend and even tactics might have been effective given (a) some sort of take-up by national media - which was non-existent to hostile - and (b) a message that resonated*. Just a few months earlier "Bollocks to Brexit" + strong ground game on local politics had resonated in the locals and the European elections, "Swinson for PM and revoke" bombed. 21% of Remain voters voted LD, 20% voted Tory. "Boris is a c*nt" would have been better if you could turn it into something printable but as pithy. "Bollocks to Brexit" wasn't printable. I had my HQ-provided leaflet drafts refused by the Royal Mail. That's extremely concerning. The Royal Mail isn't a censor.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 22, 2021 15:15:55 GMT
Sod all International Courts. Ignore them. Don't turn up. Don't offer a defence. Don't pay any heed to their kangaroo decisions. No authority is higher than British Sovereignty. End of. And of course we should withdraw from all such organizations as European, Iternational or War Crimes courts and tribunals; and the UN and allied bodies. Interfering foreign nerks the lot of them; up with which we must not put. Sounds like a slightly more blunt J Enoch Powell Surely you mean a threepenny shop Enoch Powell?
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 22, 2021 15:13:43 GMT
He was suspended in connection with his appearance as a witness at a recent public inquiry into two controversial housing schemes in Pocklington and Swanland. Can you refuse to be a witness at a public enquiry? Looks like he had the option of being in contempt of planning law for not turning up to the enquiry, or being in contempt of party rules for turning up. Apparently, he applied to talk as an interested party and pretty much complained the policies of East Riding Council were bad for developers like him.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 10, 2021 23:40:59 GMT
Sam Allerdyce, the manager of West Bromwich Albion (football).
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 5, 2021 23:10:05 GMT
How likely would the Union be to publish a poll which showed Labour struggling?It is surely the client's decision whether to reveal the details. What I find baffling about that CWU tweet is the idea that there is a correlation between the consecutive 2 sentences:
"People need and want radical change"
AND
"That's why we've commissioned a poll in Hartlepool" There is a clear link. No radical change will happen under Starmer, for two reasons. He is more interested in buttering spads and special interests than the working class. His management of the party makes Corbyn look like a competent and efficient leader.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Apr 4, 2021 0:11:49 GMT
Sounds far more useful than the political party! Can't remember the name of the guy who compiled it, but it was stuffed with SNP propaganda. At one point in 1996 there was a Labour attack on the SNP over directing people to the site, or something like that. Was a famous picture in the press of Jack McConnell (then Gen Sec of the Scottish Labour Party) accessing it on his computer and looking outraged. EDIT: Here we are! Wayback machine has it archived. The guy who wrote it was Dr Iain G. Old. He is still around, co-convenor of YES Dunbar.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Mar 30, 2021 22:05:18 GMT
No way! That would stop defections almost completely and would result in awkward rebels staying inside a party which they don't want (and which doesn't want them) rebelling in votes multiple times. I think if the public elect a Tory or a Labour MP they don't necessarily want somebody who will rebel and irritate said party all the time? And if they do they can support said rebel MP in the by election Here dies democracy. Welcome to the era of SpAds.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Mar 29, 2021 23:01:03 GMT
Why would that annoy members? I suspect some hoped they would get to run the show / have more influence after her departure.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Mar 28, 2021 22:16:47 GMT
So with Kenny McAskill now on Alba and contesting for a regional seat in the Scottish Parliament, is it possible that there could be an East Lothian by-election? As an East Lothian resident I doubt very much he will resign his seat in Westminster that would suggest even a modicum of respect for the people he is meant to represent here. I am not making a comment on double jobbing I am not a fan of it but I would not ban it I think that is for politicians and their voters to decide if they want that. This is also not a comment on nationalists there was one candidate for their nomination I am sure, whilst I wouldn't have agreed with or voted for, would have worked to support East Lothian communities and residents on issues other than independence(I have actually worked very well with him as a community activist). I am commenting on the individual, Kenny MacAskill, alone. His history on East Lothian is a litany of behaviour that shows his lack of respect for the people that live here. - Promised to move here, he never did instead spends his time in Moray
- I believe before the pandemic hit the surgeries he attended were in the single digits
- He is standing in a region which doesn't include the vast majority of the seat
- On multiple occasions during the campaign at hustings he was completely unable to comment on local issues and often wasn't even aware of where the place was
- Said during that campaign that he had been against the closure of Haddington Sheriff Court despite being the minister that closed it
All Mr MacAskill was interested in was one final spell in the spotlight, so he could spout his bile, and no doubt considering his personal life the lure of subsided bars was a welcome additional reason. Would a ban on double jobbing come from Stormont or Westminster (or both could do it)? I would assume it's coming sooner or later considering both Northern Ireland and Wales have one.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,130
|
Post by maxque on Mar 26, 2021 18:20:15 GMT
And, no old chap, the town of Hastings is NOT named after our most famous battle
WTF? Nobody said that. I said the town of Battle was named after the battle. That's why it's called battle. Because there was a battle. Where the town is now.
Well, if the battle happened in Battle, it should be named the Battle of Battle to be exact and "Battle of Hastings" is a misnomer.
|
|