Starmer's vision quest

[Pblakeney]

Notwithstanding COVID (maybe!), can anyone think of a policy more supported by every party in the UK as Starmer's stance on the Iran war?

I can't think of one in my lifetime . . .

There was initial opposition. They're still arguing over the hows and wherefores.

 

[Pross]

Notwithstanding COVID (maybe!), can anyone think of a policy more supported by every party in the UK as Starmer's stance on the Iran war?

I can't think of one in my lifetime . . .

Is Kemi supporting it today? She seems conflicted on the issue. I’m guessing Farage is just avoiding taking a view.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

Kemi is focusing on the more important issues, such as allowing motorists to speed in 20 mph zones.

 

[CXRAndy]

The beginning of the end


View: https://x.com/i/status/2043717378370904475

 

[CXRAndy]

View: https://x.com/i/status/2043720113925345733

 

[CXRAndy]

All kicking off in Ireland


View: https://x.com/i/status/2043421571663245640

 

[TailWindHome]

Sorry, what endless foreign wars?

What the fuc k is he talking about?

 

[Psamathe]

Labour's house building target facing more difficulties

UK’s largest housebuilder to buy less land, in blow to Labour’s homes target
Britain’s largest housebuilder is planning to dramatically cut back on buying new land, blaming the impact of the conflict in the Middle East and putting Labour’s ambitious housebuilding target under more pressure.

Barratt Redrow said it intends to approve between 7,000 and 9,000 plots of land for purchase in its current financial year, far lower than previous guidance of between 10,000 and 12,000.

I think Labour's mistake is focusing on Planning where reality is that's not the bottleneck. Rather it's the nature of what developer build (4+ bedroom luxury end houses) and people being able to afford what's built. Not too far from me developer built small estate and mid way through got planning to agree to them discarding the affordable housing requirement for reasons of their profitability ... and now they can't finish all houses as they can't sell those built (selling finished houses funds finishing more).
eg

Had all homes granted planning permission been built, the government would have hit its 300,000 new homes a year target for eight out of the past 10 years, according to the findings. (https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk...anted-planning-permission-are-not-being-built)

or

Claims that reforming the planning system will ‘unblock’ housing and deliver homes is not borne out by the data. Figure 2.2 shows that since 2015, almost twice as many permissions have been granted than homes have been started, and that since 2010, over 1 million homes were granted permission but have not been built. (https://ippr-org.files.svdcdn.com/p..._for_green_prosperity_Feb25.pdf?dm=1738854346)

 

[Pblakeney]

Labour's house building target facing more difficulties

I think Labour's mistake is focusing on Planning where reality is that's not the bottleneck. Rather it's the nature of what developer build (4+ bedroom luxury end houses) and people being able to afford what's built. Not too far from me developer built small estate and mid way through got planning to agree to them discarding the affordable housing requirement for reasons of their profitability ... and now they can't finish all houses as they can't sell those built (selling finished houses funds finishing more).
eg

or

Reads like the problem is with Netanyahu, Donnie, and the builders. Not Labour.
I see that answer as government funded building project of genuine affordable housing (ie 2 bed max) and reap the profits from sales or rent.

I dare say that it is not that simple and requires long term planning instead of under 4 years.

 

[Psamathe]

Reads like the problem is with Netanyahu, Donnie, and the builders. Not Labour.
I see that answer as government funded building project of genuine affordable housing (ie 2 bed max) and reap the profits from sales or rent.

I dare say that it is not that simple and requires long term planning instead of under 4 years.

Netanyahu, Donnie, etc. are current short term problems. The challenge to Labour's targets is that they are not addressing the problem so their solution won't improve things. They are missing the point

eg they focus on planning and green Belt being protected yet from 2022

Brownfield sites with room for 1.2m homes lie dormant in England
A record number of brownfield sites in England that have been identified for redevelopment and could provide 1.2m homes are lying dormant, according to an analysis.

more recently their continued accusations that environmental protections are limiting housebuilding, even Governemnt inquiries have founbd this not to be the case yet Ministers continue to repeat the discredited claims

Nature not a blocker to housing growth, inquiry finds
Commons committee report challenges ‘lazy narrative’ used by ministers that scapegoats wildlife and the environment

Nature is not a blocker to housing growth, an inquiry by MPs has found, in direct conflict with claims made by ministers.

They won't resolve the problems if they only address aspects that are not part of the problem.

 

[icowden]

I think Labour's mistake is focusing on Planning where reality is that's not the bottleneck.

Most of the literature suggests that it is entirely where the bottleneck is.

My in-laws were considering buying a house in Normandy (Guildford, not France). Normandy is an up market area of Guildford where they want to build 950 new homes. The locals are up in arms. There are campaigns, letters written to the council etc. It will bring down property prices, ruin the rural area etc etc.

Anywhere that a new development is proposed, NIMBY creeps in.

 

[Psamathe]

Most of the literature suggests that it is entirely where the bottleneck is.

My in-laws were considering buying a house in Normandy (Guildford, not France). Normandy is an up market area of Guildford where they want to build 950 new homes. The locals are up in arms. There are campaigns, letters written to the council etc. It will bring down property prices, ruin the rural area etc etc.

View attachment 14556

Anywhere that a new development is proposed, NIMBY creeps in.

Looks like agricultural land. As I posted above, there are 1.2 m sites on brownfield sites (against Labour's target of 1.5 m) so why argicultural land?

Developers are not building on plots that already have permission granted so why not allow proper scrutiny of proposed development? 1.4m homes already granted permission but not built (against Labour's 1.5 m over 5 years). ie they already have planning permission granted.

 

[Pblakeney]

Looks like agricultural land. As I posted above, there are 1.2 m sites on brownfield sites (against Labour's target of 1.5 m) so why argicultural land?

Developers are not building on plots that already have permission granted so why not allow proper scrutiny of proposed development? 1.4m homes already granted permission but not built (against Labour's 1.5 m over 5 years). ie they already have planning permission granted.

Again, that reads like a developer problem, not a Labour problem.

 

[icowden]

Again, that reads like a developer problem, not a Labour problem.

It becomes a Labour problem because if developers don't get developments approved, then they don't develop.
Hence, when house building was done by the Govt and not developers, it was far more successful.

Developers aren't going to build on brownfield sites if they don't think they can make a profit. A nice new development in rural fields will will attract much higher house prices, thus trebles all round.

 

[Pblakeney]

It becomes a Labour problem because if developers don't get developments approved, then they don't develop.
Hence, when house building was done by the Govt and not developers, it was far more successful.

Developers aren't going to build on brownfield sites if they don't think they can make a profit. A nice new development in rural fields will will attract much higher house prices, thus trebles all round.

I did address that upthread, but it got ignored.