Stop voting for fucking Tories

[_Os_]

It was common on the "Indy Left" to support Brexit in Scotland, it was an issue that was seen as either separate from or a part of Scottish independence among many and their argument went along the lines of the EU being a "Capitalist Club".

It was never a coherent argument once you started asking questions.

Interesting, it seems they've retained some thinking from the Labour left on the topic, just with support for Scottish independence added. The cold Cuba socialism in one country option but even more isolated.

Galloway is ardently pro Irish reunification. Not ambivalent. That’s not a standard Brexit position.

Corbyn has never supported Scottish independence. Is a Bennite on Europe and favourable towards Brexit, but was forced into all sorts of positions due to the vast majority of his party being against it. He was meeting regularly with Adams, IRA men and Sinn Fein men, throughout the 1980s even immediately after IRA bombings.

Is this something Galloway has even flip flopped on? Has he always been Euro sceptic/anti-EU, always anti-Scottish independence, always pro-united Ireland? If he's never changed his positions then it's just the standard Labour hard left position, of wanting a cold Cuba with Wales/Scotland forced to participate with England in that undertaking. The only difference they have with the Tory sovereignty fans, is as you say the Tories are ambivalent about NI. They all agree Scotland can never escape.

[Paddington Bear]

It’s not a coincidence that the British far left join parties/organisations that describe themselves as ‘of Great Britain’. Nor that Labour don’t run candidates in NI, and until a court case didn’t allow membership from NI. Wilson I’m fairly certain in government or just before a spell in government stated Labour’s policy was a united Ireland.

What happens in Britain itself is a separate story, and the Labour movement has tended to emphasise industrial solidarity between different parts of the island, as well as see independence as a divide and rule policy. See a socialist song like ‘Pound a Week Rise’ - ‘come all you colliers… from Scotland to South Wales, from Teesdale to Tyne’. Labour have been a strong unionist party since the start, it’s just the internet narrative of a unionist is a Tory or tory adjacent character, even if it is exceptionally ahistorical.

The SNP of course have their origins in strict Calvinist dogma and anti-Catholicism, Plaid are a rural farmer’s party. Both’s conversion to left wing politics is in pursuit of where votes might be, it isn’t too long ago the SNP were the ‘Tartan Tories’.

[Tichtheid]

It’s not a coincidence that the British far left join parties/organisations that describe themselves as ‘of Great Britain’. Nor that Labour don’t run candidates in NI, and until a court case didn’t allow membership from NI. Wilson I’m fairly certain in government or just before a spell in government stated Labour’s policy was a united Ireland.

What happens in Britain itself is a separate story, and the Labour movement has tended to emphasise industrial solidarity between different parts of the island, as well as see independence as a divide and rule policy. See a socialist song like ‘Pound a Week Rise’ - ‘come all you colliers… from Scotland to South Wales, from Teesdale to Tyne’. Labour have been a strong unionist party since the start, it’s just the internet narrative of a unionist is a Tory or tory adjacent character, even if it is exceptionally ahistorical.

The SNP of course have their origins in strict Calvinist dogma and anti-Catholicism, Plaid are a rural farmer’s party. Both’s conversion to left wing politics is in pursuit of where votes might be, it isn’t too long ago the SNP were the ‘Tartan Tories’.

It’s true that there is a theme that goes, “the miner in East Lothian has more in common with the miner in South Wales than he does the banker living in the Grange in Edinburgh”, but there is also another indy theme best characterised by a James Connolly quote,
If you remove the English army to-morrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin Castle, unless you set about the organisation of the Socialist Republic your efforts would be in vain.

England would still rule you. She would rule you through her capitalists, through her landlords, through her financiers, through the whole array of commercial and individualist institutions she has planted in this country and watered with the tears of our mothers and the blood of our martyrs.

[I like neeps]

The loss on GBNews is outrageous. I appreciate that TalkTV and GBNews are as much their ownership buying influence of the Tory party than any commercial aims. But still, they can't be getting value for money there.

[tabascoboy]

The loss on GBNews is outrageous. I appreciate that TalkTV and GBNews are as much their ownership buying influence of the Tory party than any commercial aims. But still, they can't be getting value for money there.

Would be terrible if GBNews went belly-up...for the Tories - who would they be able to grift for then?

[sockwithaticket]

Obviously it's backed a to provide an unadulterated right wing propaganda outlet. I'm not really sure what their metrics for success are, would it be something as concrete as delivering elections or something more nebulous like moving the Overton window?

[sturginho]

The loss on GBNews is outrageous. I appreciate that TalkTV and GBNews are as much their ownership buying influence of the Tory party than any commercial aims. But still, they can't be getting value for money there.

666 likes for that tweet can't be coincidence

[fishfoodie]

If you find yourself wavering before polling day, or just want to get in your 15 mins of hate, this guy does a comprehensive tear down of the horrendous economic policies & the sorry state of all the UKs data. Economics is hard to do a video about, but the charts he's lined up are devastating.

[dpedin]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

[geordie_6]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

For a Tory?

[sturginho]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

Also the irony of a Tory minister complaining that others don't live up to the Nolan principles

[Biffer]

Jeremy Cunt putting a budget out that is quite obviously a spoiling budget for the next government.

[SaintK]

Jeremy Cunt putting a budget out that is quite obviously a spoiling budget for the next government.

He is snivelling piece of shit
Someone on the front bench needs to tell hin to stop with the "jokes" they are truly pathetic!!!

[I like neeps]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

The Tax Payers Alliance are going to be furious when they hear about this.

[Biffer]

SNP have forced a division on the budget motion

Labpour are abstaining so are staying put, but they've forced all the Tories to get off their fat arses and walk through the lobby.

Pretty sure their justification for this will be that if tradition etc isn't being applied to the SNP after their opposition day, they don't see why they should respect it for anyone else.On a larger scale it points out the utter absurdity of the way the UK is governed.

[inactionman]

SNP have forced a division on the budget motion

Labpour are abstaining so are staying put, but they've forced all the Tories to get off their fat arses and walk through the lobby.

Pretty sure their justification for this will be that if tradition etc isn't being applied to the SNP after their opposition day, they don't see why they should respect it for anyone else.On a larger scale it points out the utter absurdity of the way the UK is governed.

There's not a great deal admirable in that.

fecking around with government for political theatre. Plus ça change.

[Slick]

SNP have forced a division on the budget motion

Labpour are abstaining so are staying put, but they've forced all the Tories to get off their fat arses and walk through the lobby.

Pretty sure their justification for this will be that if tradition etc isn't being applied to the SNP after their opposition day, they don't see why they should respect it for anyone else.On a larger scale it points out the utter absurdity of the way the UK is governed.

There's not a great deal admirable in that.

fecking around with government for political theatre. Plus ça change.

Well, they had to do something after the MSP who is head of their "Rebuttal Unit" demanded they should all leave Westminster then 48 hours later rebutted himself and said they should all stay and it was madness to suggest otherwise. A day in the life of Scottish politics.

[sturginho]

SNP have forced a division on the budget motion

Labpour are abstaining so are staying put, but they've forced all the Tories to get off their fat arses and walk through the lobby.

Pretty sure their justification for this will be that if tradition etc isn't being applied to the SNP after their opposition day, they don't see why they should respect it for anyone else.On a larger scale it points out the utter absurdity of the way the UK is governed.

There's not a great deal admirable in that.

fecking around with government for political theatre. Plus ça change.

Well, they had to do something after the MSP who is head of their "Rebuttal Unit" demanded they should all leave Westminster then 48 hours later rebutted himself and said they should all stay and it was madness to suggest otherwise. A day in the life of Scottish politics.

top rebutting!

[inactionman]

SNP have forced a division on the budget motion

Labpour are abstaining so are staying put, but they've forced all the Tories to get off their fat arses and walk through the lobby.

Pretty sure their justification for this will be that if tradition etc isn't being applied to the SNP after their opposition day, they don't see why they should respect it for anyone else.On a larger scale it points out the utter absurdity of the way the UK is governed.

There's not a great deal admirable in that.

fecking around with government for political theatre. Plus ça change.

Well, they had to do something after the MSP who is head of their "Rebuttal Unit" demanded they should all leave Westminster then 48 hours later rebutted himself and said they should all stay and it was madness to suggest otherwise. A day in the life of Scottish politics.

He clearly needs a good rebutt.

[SaintK]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

Two at a time, like London buses!

A Conservative peer has apologised and paid damages to a doctoral student after wrongly saying an octopus soft toy used as her University Challenge team’s mascot was chosen as an antisemitic symbol.
The former MEP Jacqueline Foster had already apologised publicly and privately to Melika Gorgianeh, a doctoral student in astrophysics at Oxford University, following comments made after the episode of the BBC Two quizshow was broadcast in November.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/ ... allenge

[dpedin]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

Two at a time, like London buses!

A Conservative peer has apologised and paid damages to a doctoral student after wrongly saying an octopus soft toy used as her University Challenge team’s mascot was chosen as an antisemitic symbol.
The former MEP Jacqueline Foster had already apologised publicly and privately to Melika Gorgianeh, a doctoral student in astrophysics at Oxford University, following comments made after the episode of the BBC Two quizshow was broadcast in November.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/ ... allenge

No doubt paid through expenses as well. They are really a bunch a cnuts!

[fishfoodie]

Clearing the decks before the GE gets called, & must use up those expenses !

[Biffer]

SNP have forced a division on the budget motion

Labpour are abstaining so are staying put, but they've forced all the Tories to get off their fat arses and walk through the lobby.

Pretty sure their justification for this will be that if tradition etc isn't being applied to the SNP after their opposition day, they don't see why they should respect it for anyone else.On a larger scale it points out the utter absurdity of the way the UK is governed.

There's not a great deal admirable in that.

fecking around with government for political theatre. Plus ça change.

When they've try
ied not to do that, the other parties just do it anyway and they end up with the shitty end of the stick.

[sockwithaticket]

Good speech from Starmer.

[Slick]

Good speech from Starmer.

Yes, watched it live and thought the same. There was a fair bit of squirming on the Tory benches and Rishi took a sudden interest in his iPad

[sockwithaticket]

Good speech from Starmer.

Yes, watched it live and thought the same. There was a fair bit of squirming on the Tory benches and Rishi took a sudden interest in his iPad

They're all fully aware that there was nothing said that they could credibly dispute.

[I like neeps]

What a bizarre attack line, Labour aren't going to reduce taxes. I'd be surprised if they don't continue to grow as we have more councils go bust and more demand from the oldies and unhealthies on the NHS. Oh, and the water companies going bust and schools still falling down.

Time for a party to be honest. Taxes are going to have to rise for things to be fixed. Or, moving to European/Australian healthcare.

[fishfoodie]

What a bizarre attack line, Labour aren't going to reduce taxes. I'd be surprised if they don't continue to grow as we have more councils go bust and more demand from the oldies and unhealthies on the NHS. Oh, and the water companies going bust and schools still falling down.

Time for a party to be honest. Taxes are going to have to rise for things to be fixed. Or, moving to European/Australian healthcare.

.... and that's why that video I linked above is so important; it shows the box that any new Government is in, because of how totally the Tories have fucked the UK economy !

- It's okay, we'll just borrow more.
> Sorry, the Tories doubled the National debt, & now interest rates are multiples larger

- It's okay, we'll just grow the economy & get more taxes without raising tax rates
> Are you on drugs ????, how ?, where ?, did you miss the Brexit thing ?

- It's okay, we're building a knowledge economy, & we've the best Universities in the world, so we'll be kings of AI, & Genetic Engineering, & Blockchain .....
> See last answer (Oh, & have you not noticed the destruction of the Education system ?)

If Labour get three terms they might be able to get back to 2007 levels of economic health.

[_Os_]

Hunt says £242m of Levelling Up funding is going into ... Canary Wharf and Barking Riverside. Apparently 8000 homes will be built.

I can't be the only one thinking this is very suspicious? There's some media focus on Levelling Up money now literally being pumped into Canary Wharf. But the claim of 8000 homes doesn't look at all possible for that amount of money, it would need multiples more.

It makes me wonder why Canary Wharf? It's privately owned by the Canary Wharf Group (which is in turn owned by the Qatar government and a US property group), this is why it's notoriously difficult to film or protest there, it's private property. Canary Wharf is basically the model for the Tory free ports, which are predictably turning out to be corrupt cesspits. Commercial property isn't exactly going through a bull run, legitimate to wonder how viable the old Canary Wharf business model is. Which is probably why the Canary Wharf Group setup its Vertus subsidiary in around 2019/2020, a built to rent property group (they do not sell what they build) that is developing in Canary Wharf. The Canary Wharf Group/Vertus business model is that only they get to own and everyone else rents.

I could be wrong, but my hunch is that Levelling Up funding could be being pumped into Vertus housing projects. The Tories are deeply ideologically committed to Canary Wharf continuing to exist as a private entity. But if the business model becomes renting to people who cannot just "move somewhere else" given the realities of the London/South East property and rental market, and the landlord doesn't just own the dwelling but the entire neighbourhood, and the landlord owns about £5bn of property across London and has no intention of selling any of it, and this is all supported by extracting rent from people with limited options. Then the business model is neo-feudalism.

The story of privatisation in the UK ... Tories setup Canary Wharf as a private entity, this entity ends up being state owned just not by the UK state, the private/foreign government owned entity at the very least sees potential risks in their business model, so the private/foreign government owned entity starts squeezing normal people living in the UK for additional rent (when the original point of all this was supposed to be about generating investment), this scheme also potentially being supported through UK public funds.

[I like neeps]

What a bizarre attack line, Labour aren't going to reduce taxes. I'd be surprised if they don't continue to grow as we have more councils go bust and more demand from the oldies and unhealthies on the NHS. Oh, and the water companies going bust and schools still falling down.

Time for a party to be honest. Taxes are going to have to rise for things to be fixed. Or, moving to European/Australian healthcare.

.... and that's why that video I linked above is so important; it shows the box that any new Government is in, because of how totally the Tories have fucked the UK economy !

- It's okay, we'll just borrow more.
> Sorry, the Tories doubled the National debt, & now interest rates are multiples larger

- It's okay, we'll just grow the economy & get more taxes without raising tax rates
> Are you on drugs ????, how ?, where ?, did you miss the Brexit thing ?

- It's okay, we're building a knowledge economy, & we've the best Universities in the world, so we'll be kings of AI, & Genetic Engineering, & Blockchain .....
> See last answer (Oh, & have you not noticed the destruction of the Education system ?)

If Labour get three terms they might be able to get back to 2007 levels of economic health.

They also need to increase defence spending most likely too.

I could not agree nore that the Conservative government has been a disaster and have thought so since 2015. Austerity has completely gutted the UK, and QE has ballooned inequality in favour of their voters (the asset owners).

And it's why it's so important Labour are honest. As you have laid out, continued decline and tax rises are inevitable. Labour need to start being honest about that because the second they get into power and things don't improve, or when they do inevitably rise taxes, and the Tory press get their claws in... It doesn't end well. For them, but mostly for us the UK public.

The problem is Rachael Reeves is going around and saying "there's no magic money tree" and Darren Jones is saying "the Tories have maxed out the credit card". It's totally self defeating as (a) it's wrong and (b) to continue to blame them in govt you probably can do for maybe a year or so but won't last forever because the press aren't in on it and you'll have Farage/Badenoch screeching in the press daily.

And yes the Tories blamed Labour, successfully, for the GFC for years but that's because the press wanted austerity because they ideologically want a smaller state. What they don't realise is paying for underfunding is more expensive than paying for things to work. A good example will be Birmingham council cutting adult and children's social care because they're bust. That's great, but the adults clogging the NHS and children without prospects being in the jail or economically inactive is more expensive.

[dpedin]

Hunt says £242m of Levelling Up funding is going into ... Canary Wharf and Barking Riverside. Apparently 8000 homes will be built.

I can't be the only one thinking this is very suspicious? There's some media focus on Levelling Up money now literally being pumped into Canary Wharf. But the claim of 8000 homes doesn't look at all possible for that amount of money, it would need multiples more.

It makes me wonder why Canary Wharf? It's privately owned by the Canary Wharf Group (which is in turn owned by the Qatar government and a US property group), this is why it's notoriously difficult to film or protest there, it's private property. Canary Wharf is basically the model for the Tory free ports, which are predictably turning out to be corrupt cesspits. Commercial property isn't exactly going through a bull run, legitimate to wonder how viable the old Canary Wharf business model is. Which is probably why the Canary Wharf Group setup its Vertus subsidiary in around 2019/2020, a built to rent property group (they do not sell what they build) that is developing in Canary Wharf. The Canary Wharf Group/Vertus business model is that only they get to own and everyone else rents.

I could be wrong, but my hunch is that Levelling Up funding could be being pumped into Vertus housing projects. The Tories are deeply ideologically committed to Canary Wharf continuing to exist as a private entity. But if the business model becomes renting to people who cannot just "move somewhere else" given the realities of the London/South East property and rental market, and the landlord doesn't just own the dwelling but the entire neighbourhood, and the landlord owns about £5bn of property across London and has no intention of selling any of it, and this is all supported by extracting rent from people with limited options. Then the business model is neo-feudalism.

The story of privatisation in the UK ... Tories setup Canary Wharf as a private entity, this entity ends up being state owned just not by the UK state, the private/foreign government owned entity at the very least sees potential risks in their business model, so the private/foreign government owned entity starts squeezing normal people living in the UK for additional rent (when the original point of all this was supposed to be about generating investment), this scheme also potentially being supported through UK public funds.

I didnt know this detail about Canary Wharf - very interesting! I dont disagree with your rational why Hunt is pumping money into it and agree entirely with your projected end point. It is in effect an early model of the 'Sovereign Individual' ideology in action!

[Sandstorm]

The Canary Wharf Group/Vertus business model is that only they get to own and everyone else rents.

This is the new model cropping up everywhere. Our town is in a battle with developers who want to bulldoze a 200 year old section of 2 story buildings near the High Street and replace with 6 story high flats for rent only. Zero care given to heritage, over-stretched local services or parking.

[SaintK]

Not usually a big fan of Amol Rajan but this one struck home!!!

[sockwithaticket]

The Canary Wharf Group/Vertus business model is that only they get to own and everyone else rents.

This is the new model cropping up everywhere. Our town is in a battle with developers who want to bulldoze a 200 year old section of 2 story buildings near the High Street and replace with 6 story high flats for rent only. Zero care given to heritage, over-stretched local services or parking.

This is what I strongly dislike about people tossing the term NIMBY around any time there's objection to construction. Despite the UK lagging on housebuilding, there has been enough construction over the last several years to provide plenty of examples of local infrastructure and services not even being so much as an afterthought in the development process. The two need to go hand in hand.

There are people who obstruct just for the sake of it or to preserve their property value, but a lot simply don't want their access to GPs or school places diminish further or to have to park their cars miles from their homes.

[I like neeps]

The Canary Wharf Group/Vertus business model is that only they get to own and everyone else rents.

This is the new model cropping up everywhere. Our town is in a battle with developers who want to bulldoze a 200 year old section of 2 story buildings near the High Street and replace with 6 story high flats for rent only. Zero care given to heritage, over-stretched local services or parking.

This is what I strongly dislike about people tossing the term NIMBY around any time there's objection to construction. Despite the UK lagging on housebuilding, there has been enough construction over the last several years to provide plenty of examples of local infrastructure and services not even being so much as an afterthought in the development process. The two need to go hand in hand.

There are people who obstruct just for the sake of it or to preserve their property value, but a lot simply don't want their access to GPs or school places diminish further or to have to park their cars miles from their homes.

It's a bit chicken and the egg though, over stretched public services and poorly funded GP are a direct result of the Government that home owners continue to vote for.

What needs to happen is developers pay tax which is used for building of said public services. But instead developers pay the conservatives to helpfully lower their tax burden.

[Paddington Bear]

I’m sorry if we can’t build flats in town centres then we need to have a serious conversation about a population policy as there’s clearly no way of housing the population we have. Fwiw, the old ‘high street’ is on it’s arse up and down the country (with exceptions), you’d have thought a hundred or so new residents in close proximity might give it a little boost.

[I like neeps]

I’m sorry if we can’t build flats in town centres then we need to have a serious conversation about a population policy as there’s clearly no way of housing the population we have. Fwiw, the old ‘high street’ is on it’s arse up and down the country (with exceptions), you’d have thought a hundred or so new residents in close proximity might give it a little boost.

The population policy is: I don't mind it growing, just nowhere near me.

[sockwithaticket]

Well we do and we don't. There's an estimated quarter of a million vacant homes in the UK, many of them in areas where there aren't as many job opportunities. The reticence to embrace remote work and insistence on hybrid or return to office from many companies prevents workers from fanning out and inhabiting these.

Government needs to do a lot of investing too. Even if we insist that developers contribute more to the local infrastructure that should support an increase in the local population there need to be the teachers, doctors, nurses, dentists, bin men etc. to occupy the buildings and do the jobs.

There needs to be a grown up conversation about using migrants to prop up the economy, while simultaneously building nowhere near the number of homes that would be required even without net migration in the hundreds of thousands. HMOs in a lot of spots are providing less space for more people.

A lot of fairly cash strapped councils keep doing things to further kill off the high street like maintaining high business rates and parking charges, even increasing them in some areas. Allowing people to live in what used to be the high street won't reinvigorate if business can barely afford to operate there or customers to visit.

[Biffer]

Turns out the headline is wrong - as it says later in the article we the taxpayer have ended up paying for this. Surely this is a resigning matter given she is actually Minister for State for Science, Innovation and Technology?

PS Her husband is also CEO I think of company, Stronghold Global, that benefitted greatly from PPE contracts during the pandemic. Suely they must have gouged enough profits for that to cover some measly damages claim?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68486206

I work for UKRI. I have no confidence in her.

You might say 'you don't have confidence in any Tory' which is true to an extent but I can bite my tongue for professional reasons and the greater good of developing science and high value jobs in the UK. Some of her predecessors were at least vaguely useful in their role - David Willets was a very good science Minister, George Freeman goes out and tub thumps very well particularly on quantum(but needs a bit more working to stay on message), Greg Clark was ok, Alok Sharma was decent. No opinion on Andrew Griffith yet.

[Sandstorm]

I’m sorry if we can’t build flats in town centres then we need to have a serious conversation about a population policy as there’s clearly no way of housing the population we have. Fwiw, the old ‘high street’ is on it’s arse up and down the country (with exceptions), you’d have thought a hundred or so new residents in close proximity might give it a little boost.

The population policy is: I don't mind it growing, just nowhere near me.

I have no issue with development. I do care if it's grossly over-sized or rental only. You can't build a decent community with transient residents IMO.

Also there are about a dozen (70s style) commercial buildings (offices, warehouses, etc) in close proximity to this proposed area that have stood empty for 10+ years. Bulldoze those eye-sores if you want some new flats!

One 1920s office building has stood empty for 14 years (my wife use to work in it) and is finally being turned into flats. 4 bedroom penthouses for £1m+ each, but you know....