Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
You must log in or register to see media

May bribes the ERG to back her deal. We are now in the hands of people with no interest in the people of this country, just the means to squeeze more cash out of them.

Edit: apologies to Imps for soiling the page with a Guardian tweet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: San Tejón and ImpSaint
ImpSaint said:
So it is nothing to do with Henley Homes donating to the Labour party as well as the mayor of London then. Good to know.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Henley Homes only built the properties as designed and was faithful to the planning permission,. The separation was created after it was moved on and they were no longer involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: garysfc and ChilcoSaint
ImpSaint said:
Not at all. It's Chris Grayling's birthday (yes it is true!!!) and they all want an excuse not to go to his party.
Click to expand...
He'll never blow out all the candles on his cake, more likely to stick his foot in it, the other being stuck in his mouth.
 
Last edited:
StJabbo said:
He'll never blow out all the candles on his cake, more likely to stick his foot in it, the other being suck in his mouth.
Click to expand...

He'll go to the wrong place or book it on the wrong day anyway. I wouldn't worry about him failing to the blow the candles out for any other reason.
 
VocalMinority said:
Yeah, Henley Homes only built the properties as designed and was faithful to the planning permission,. The separation was created after it was moved on and they were no longer involved.
Click to expand...

So Lambeth Council aren't to blame then. I guess these must be right wingers in 2016 then, not understanding "the law" and how Lambeth Council "are helpless."

You must log in or register to see images


Note the date on Jonathan Meade's comment in the article. The displacement map is quite a visual highlighting of the problem as well:

As the critic Jonathan Meades wrote in 2006: “Privilege is centripetal. Want is centrifugal … in the future, deprivation, crime and riots will be comfortably confined to outside the ring road.”

And the date on this one:
This “**** but real” versus “polished but soulless” dichotomy was borne out in Hackney in London in 2009, when the borough’s mayor, Jules Pipe, condemned opponents of regeneration for wanting to “keep Hackney crap” – prompting a tongue-in-cheek campaign proposing to do exactly that.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/...rotest-backlash-urban-generation-displacement

What a lot of these articles don't show is just how many people have been "shipped out of London" altogether. Like I have said for a while. There are a lot of London accents around on the Northern Estates. Been happening now for a long long time. Nothing to do with Austerity.
 
Last edited:
ImpSaint said:
So Lambeth Council aren't to blame then. I guess these must be right wingers in 2016 then, not understanding "the law" and how Lambeth Council "are helpless."

You must log in or register to see images


Note the date on Jonathan Meade's comment in the article. The displacement map is quite a visual highlighting of the problem as well:

As the critic Jonathan Meades wrote in 2006: “Privilege is centripetal. Want is centrifugal … in the future, deprivation, crime and riots will be comfortably confined to outside the ring road.”

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/...rotest-backlash-urban-generation-displacement

What a lot of these articles don't show is just how many people have been "shipped out of London" altogether. Like I have said for a while. There are a lot of London accents around on the Northern Estates. Been happening now for a long long time.
Click to expand...
More that they were protesting about something that had nothing to do with this development.


Just so you know it was built over a school, it wasn't a redevelopment of social housing.
 
Last edited:
VocalMinority said:
More that they were protesting about something that had nothing to do with this development.


Just so you know it was built over a school, it wasn't a redevelopment of social housing.
Click to expand...

State land that the Tories and Blair have sold off in the past 20 years. Does it matter? Blair's government and the Tory government should have made sure their local authorities built council houses on land they owned. Not flogged it off in exchange for some donations (Henley Homes are not the only ones, they all seem to "donate" when it suits to) and then turned a blind eye to the planning regulations being breached (or allowing the loopholes in the first place to render breaches non enforceable.)

This is not a Tory austerity issue. It has been pushed like Mad since Blair took over. Not just in London but across the western world in their cities there has been a celebration of areas "being improved" and crime "reducing" when the reality is they just shipped the "poor folk" out and replaced them with better behaved people with more money.

No-one seems to see the irony that if you look at maps of Greater London over time the increase in benefits payments has decreased in the centre and increased on the outer while the Labour vote has increased in these "newly enriched" areas!!! They have most definitely become a fashionable hobby for the more affluent new middle class to support.

Anyways. I shall be voting green again this May like I did last year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: garysfc
ImpSaint said:
State land that the Tories and Blair have sold off in the past 20 years. Does it matter? Blair's government and the Tory government should have made sure their local authorities built council houses on land they owned. Not flogged it off in exchange for some donations (Henley Homes are not the only ones, they all seem to "donate" when it suits to) and then turned a blind eye to the planning regulations being breached (or allowing the loopholes in the first place to render breaches non enforceable.)

This is not a Tory austerity issue. It has been pushed like Mad since Blair took over. Not just in London but across the western world in their cities there has been a celebration of areas "being improved" and crime "reducing" when the reality is they just shipped the "poor folk" out and replaced them with better behaved people with more money.

No-one seems to see the irony that if you look at maps of Greater London over time the increase in benefits payments has decreased in the centre and increased on the outer while the Labour vote has increased in these "newly enriched" areas!!! They have most definitely become a fashionable hobby for the more affluent new middle class to support.

Anyways. I shall be voting green again this May like I did last year.
Click to expand...
So you think people should need planning permission to erect fences on the border of their privately owned land?

Anyway it looks like warwick have bowed to public pressure and is going to allow access to the other block now.
 
VocalMinority said:
So you think people should need planning permission to erect fences on the border of their privately owned land?

Anyway it looks like warwick have bowed to public pressure and is going to allow access to the other block now.
Click to expand...

I think if the initial "salespitch" was that this would be people from all aspects of society mixing together, cultural "blending" and that the initial planning permission said that X number of social housing should be built with shared facilities then they should be forced to do what they said they would do............seeing as they most likely made "donations" in order to be given the state owned land in the first place.

Like everything else it seems there are loopholes intentionally put into everything in order that those who should have been enforcing things end up with a "couldn't do anything about it" excuse.

This isn't about people. If you want to put up a fence then put one up. It's your land. This was state land sold to a developer on the basis of what they had promised to do with that land.
 
SaintinSerbia said:
Confused from Serbia - why would May resigning make the DUP vote for her deal?
Click to expand...

I doubt it will. She is just trying to push the ERG into voting for her to go. She has said if her deal loses again she is staying. If she can get all her party and then some Labour then she won't need DUP for the deal.
 
ImpSaint said:
I think if the initial "salespitch" was that this would be people from all aspects of society mixing together, cultural "blending" and that the initial planning permission said that X number of social housing should be built with shared facilities then they should be forced to do what they said they would do............seeing as they most likely made "donations" in order to be given the state owned land in the first place.

Like everything else it seems there are loopholes intentionally put into everything in order that those who should have been enforcing things end up with a "couldn't do anything about it" excuse.

This isn't about people. If you want to put up a fence then put one up. It's your land. This was state land sold to a developer on the basis of what they had promised to do with that land.
Click to expand...
And of course Warwick were never involved in any of this, so never made any of these promises. Also I severely doubt it was ever written down on the agreement that they wouldn't put down a fence. So while I dont agree with the segregation, the council wouldn't have any legal ability to change it. This isn't a purposely created loop hole, its rules that have good reason to be there that are being exploited and it IS the same planning permission rules as for normal people or anyone else.



Also we don't ever have to bribe anybody when we redevelop schools into new houses. But I'm sure your imagination will be of more evidence to you than my first had experience of the industry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint
ImpSaint said:
I doubt it will. She is just trying to push the ERG into voting for her to go. She has said if her deal loses again she is staying. If she can get all her party and then some Labour then she won't need DUP for the deal.
Click to expand...
She’ll need a few of them to overcome the deficit of the negative DUP vote. JRM now says he’ll support the deal only if the DUP does. So unless he knows something no one else knows, it’s still all up in the air.
 
Looks like May finally figured out what everyone else already did. Claim victory anyway you can then and GTFO.

What kind of devil's bargain is this? I would never trust anyone who would change their vote because May is stepping down. What difference does that make? Either her Brexit deal is good or it sucks. Nothing has changed, other than a chance for some greedy bastards to make a grab for power.

On the other hand, I would never have trusted those who won't change their vote in the first place. They're either crazy unreasonable zealots or they're too craven to stick their necks out on the line and are just picking a stance and sticking to it while hiding their heads in the sand.

Who is winning the race to the bottom, the US or the UK?
 
  • Like
Reactions: davecg69, ImpSaint and ----HistoryRepeating----
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back