UK Politics

[steviewevie]

13 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I have seen the impact of new housing where I live and the houses are build without the infrastructure in place. Village shops are closing down because there isn’t enough parking to cope with the additional demand, schools are full and can’t cope with the extra kids. 

 

What often happens is these dodgy house building companies promise to invest in changes to roads as part of contract for the labs, but do everything they can to delay. The houses are then full before the necessary changes have been made

so there is the argument of how it should be done properly, it isn't a reason that they should just not build new houses.

[charlierc]

4 hours ago, steviewevie said:

BRM_CreateStreets_New-Towns-Report_111224.pdf

... this is how I find one of the sites under consideration is right by the village where I live, likely to be in a position to eventually swallow it up huh. Great.

 

And I'm aware all these houses they wanna build have to go somewhere, but be nice to have a bit more warning.

 

Much as I'm aware this Britain Remade lot are a think-tank, although apparently some on the local council have heard whispers this is being considered and the MP isn't exactly denying things.

Edited 13 hours ago by charlierc

[Neil]

6 hours ago, lost said:

 

I think it is just short of another Bristol. 40k a year over 5 year parliament, 2.3 average occupancy, I make that 472k. Google says Bristol is 483k.

house building is a great way of pumping the economy because of all the side benefits of couring people to move house.

[kaosmark2]

3 hours ago, lost said:

 

We were always told that was Leeds. Largest in Europe without mass transit apparently. Seems to be an issue with the UK generally.

Is that Leeds/Bradford as a combined? I keep seeing different stats for size of Leeds and I think it's got less-clearly defined borders.

[Ryan1984]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I have seen the impact of new housing where I live and the houses are build without the infrastructure in place. Village shops are closing down because there isn’t enough parking to cope with the additional demand, schools are full and can’t cope with the extra kids. 

 

What often happens is these dodgy house building companies promise to invest in changes to roads as part of contract for the labs, but do everything they can to delay. The houses are then full before the necessary changes have been made

I live on a new build estate and you’ve got it 100% spot on. A lot of saying wait for the council, who are unable to do anything until it’s handed over.

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, steviewevie said:

so there is the argument of how it should be done properly, it isn't a reason that they should just not build new houses.

Another unintended consequence is that by adding more houses the schools don’t have the places to take everyone in catchment and it ends up being decided on distance to the school which pushes up the prices of houses as you get closer to the school. For the good schools it’s effectively turning them into private schools, it’s just the extra money is going into the cost of the house and not the school fees.

 

I agree it’s not a reason not to do things properly, however my experience is things are not done properly and the houses are built before the proper steps are in place.

[steviewevie]

whoops

 

[steviewevie]

7 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

Another unintended consequence is that by adding more houses the schools don’t have the places to take everyone in catchment and it ends up being decided on distance to the school which pushes up the prices of houses as you get closer to the school. For the good schools it’s effectively turning them into private schools, it’s just the extra money is going into the cost of the house and not the school fees.

 

I agree it’s not a reason not to do things properly, however my experience is things are not done properly and the houses are built before the proper steps are in place.

yeah, well we'll see. This will be one of the things the government will be judged on, and will likely be damaging no matter how turns out because they will most likely not hit these targets and in mean time will upset a lot of locals when they see nice open areas near them being built on. Same with net zero stuff. They've kind of set themselves up for a fall..want to do lots of hard, painful, disruptive stuff..like Attlee's govt but without the support that Attlee's govt had and without a post war all in it together vibe...and even his govt only lasted one term because the population were sick of all the sacrifices.

 

Really shouldn't be talking about next election but what is actually good for the country, but anyway the thing that both helps and hurts Labour is Reform...helps because still splits the right vote, hurts because they're 2nd in a lot of seats labour won...and there's always the possibility of a Tory-Reform deal. Big problem for Labour is they're literally f**king off everyone at the moment, who are they for?

Edited 1 hour ago by steviewevie