Spark
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2012
- Messages
- 2,274
The cnuts don’t want his name to come out. Shameful.The Tories aren’t suspending the whip from the MP accused of rape. Unbelievable.
The cnuts don’t want his name to come out. Shameful.The Tories aren’t suspending the whip from the MP accused of rape. Unbelievable.
As someone who works for one of the “big PLCs” I’d agree with all of this and also the simple fact that we simply cannot build out big developments as quickly as some seem to think. 1000 unit scheme will take 10+ years to get a complete site built. Bit unfair to include remaining units in those numbers. We spend in excess of 100k on getting a successful planning application so we aren’t sitting on these permissions for fun, once we get them through we’re onsite ASAP. Viability another big one, really commend the smaller developers, the risk they take on really doesn’t seem worth it for the margins.Lack of money from developers/ owners of the land, better opportunities developers are working through first, the plans approved are too expensive/ or not workable to build, speculation growth (where actually its more valuable to keep the land as it because it’s increasing in value), CIL, requirement for social housing makes the development non profitable.
Lapsed planning permission is another one, usually the planning is valid for 3 years, so the majority of of those approvals will have expired (assuming those approvals were equally split across the past 10 years). A site with previous planning means it’s more likely to be approved again, but still have to go through the process.
What's some of the reasons why the houses haven't been built? Genuine question as I have no clue.
The Conservatives refused to build more social housing because they worried it would create more Labour voters, Nick Clegg has said.
Speaking ahead of the release of his new book, Politics Between the Extremes, the former Deputy Prime Minister said top figures on David Cameron’s team viewed housing as a “petri dish”.
“It would have been in a Quad meeting, so either Cameron or Osborne. One of them – I honestly can’t remember whom – looked genuinely nonplussed and said, ‘I don’t understand why you keep going on about the need for more social housing – it just creates Labour voters.’ They genuinely saw housing as a petri dish for voters. It was unbelievable,” he said.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...e-labour-voters-nick-clegg-says-a7223796.html
Anything goes.The Tories aren’t suspending the whip from the MP accused of rape. Unbelievable.
Why not renovate disused buildings? That is far more ecologically viable. As I also said, archaeology is part of the planning process and this rule would byass that.Such a pointless quote (not from you, but the opposition to this). There are other reasons why these homes haven’t been built, but still given the outdated planning rules, smaller developments struggle to get built, and there needs to be some focus on these small developments that can never get off the ground as planning takes too long and is too risky.
This will help the small and micro businesses, and sole traders, which generally speaking make up a massive % of the working population.
I’m not interested in helping Bovis or big developers build 50+ houses. We need to help get rid of the red tape for the small developments which will employ local people.
Often renovating a disused building is far more expensive than building new, and whilst clearly different for each building lends its self to change of use into flats rather than houses.Why not renovate disused buildings? That is far more ecologically viable. As I also said, archaeology is part of the planning process and this rule would byass that.
So that's great if it's helping a few people get back working if it means loads of other industries will be hit hard by this ruling that doesn't even mean that the houses built through auto planning will be affordable for those in the working population.
Because they're named in that process. That's why it hasn't happened.Realistically why wouldn’t you suspend the whip from whomever it was? How can you justify that?
Was the first thought that popped into my headMark Francois is trending on Twitter and people are wondering if he has had a nice weekend. Infer what you will from that but let’s not speculate what it might mean.
I despise the Tories probably more than anyone else on this forum, but publicly suspending the whip from the accused will only reveal who he is. Makes more sense to keep it quiet until the allegations are more thoroughly investigated.The Tories aren’t suspending the whip from the MP accused of rape. Unbelievable.
If it was just about that then sure I’d agree but I don’t see how someone accused of such severe charges can continue to do constituent surgeries either. Sure people deserve the right to anonymity when charges are brought, but it doesn’t really work for MPs.I despise the Tories probably more than anyone else on this forum, but publicly suspending the whip from the accused will only reveal who he is. Makes more sense to keep it quiet until the allegations are more thoroughly investigated.
Yeah I think it's getting more attention than it merits. People would be better off focusing their energy on something more substantial and significant, such as the fact the Tories have starved the judicial system of funding and rape convictions have fallen to record lows recently in England and Wales.I despise the Tories probably more than anyone else on this forum, but publicly suspending the whip from the accused will only reveal who he is. Makes more sense to keep it quiet until the allegations are more thoroughly investigated.
I despise the Tories probably more than anyone else on this forum
Why? MPs are still obliged to the same virtue of innocent until proven guilty, especially with such damaging allegations that will likely taint them, irrespective of whether they're found guilty or not.If it was just about that then sure I’d agree but I don’t see how someone accused of such severe charges can continue to do constituent surgeries either. Sure people deserve the right to anonymity when charges are brought, but it doesn’t really work for MPs.
Agreed.Yeah I think it's getting more attention than it merits. People would be better off focusing their energy on something more substantial and significant, such as the fact the Tories have starved the judicial system of funding and rape convictions have fallen to record lows recently in England and Wales.
People accused of rape aren't entitled to anonymity, nor should they be. That's a completely different thing to being innocent until proven guilty. If he's charged with rape, he should absolutely not be working as an MP whilst the case is ongoing.Why? MPs are still obliged to the same virtue of innocent until proven guilty, especially with such damaging allegations that will likely taint them, irrespective of whether they're found guilty or not.
Until he's actually proven guilty, he still has an obligation to his constituents.
Agreed.
Constituency surgeries can cover some incredibly personal and sensitive issues. How would you feel if you were a vulnerable young woman who later found out you’d been revealing very personal information and receiving help from a rapist?Why? MPs are still obliged to the same virtue of innocent until proven guilty, especially with such damaging allegations that will likely taint them, irrespective of whether they're found guilty or not.
Until he's actually proven guilty, he still has an obligation to his constituents.
Yeah read that this morning. Thoroughly depressing. The country is being looted by these parasites. No moral compass whatsoever.
Disgusting, people should be sacked and there should be criminal investigations for this kind of thing .Yeah read that this morning. Thoroughly depressing. The country is being looted by these parasites. No moral compass whatsoever.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
How are we standing with regards to the previous 4-5 years? What I mean is has our growth these part few years been better or worse than it was in 2009, or any other recession period.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Around the 1% to 2% mark(2018 & 2019 was the lowest since 2010)-How are we standing with regards to the previous 4-5 years? What I mean is has our growth these part few years been better or worse than it was in 2009, or any other recession period.
The UK is basically a zombie economy.The slowdown in Britain’s productivity growth over the last decade is the worst since the start of the Industrial Revolution 250 years ago, a dismal track record that is holding back gains in living standards across the country.
Research from academics at the University of Sussex and Loughborough University shows that the productivity growth slowdown since the 2008 financial crisis is nearly twice as bad as the previous worst decade for efficiency gains, 1971-1981, and is unprecedented in more than two centuries.
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...wdown-worst-since-industrial-revolution-study
At least we'll have plenty of brains to feed on.Around the 1% to 2% mark(2018 & 2019 was the lowest since 2010)-
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281734/gdp-growth-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/
Productivity is the worse since the Industrial revolution
The UK is basically a zombie economy.
Shameful.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The world must be a much easier place when you can uncritically swallow whatever the MoD claims to be the case. A quick check confirms that they are lying when they call it a surveillance aircraft.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
a surveillance plane is probably what you would use to check people are not drowning and to direct on the ground support to intercept illegal immigrants
probably not what you would use to "scare people"