Oboogie wrote: ↑Tue Aug 25, 2026 9:56 pmIn absolute numbers, maybe, but try wrestling with the lack of social housing in an area blighted by over-tourism where NIMBY incomers will try and stop new housing estates using every delaying tactic available.Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Aug 25, 2026 7:35 pm That's why the debate in Scotland and Wales is different. There's not an alternative waiting to do that.But it's England where the need for social housing is greatest.
Killer Whale wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2026 8:49 amI'm very aware of that problem as it's a local crisis (in South West England) just as it is in Wales, parts of Scotland and elsewhere in England. I'm not sure what the answer is but nimbyism is a UK wide trait.Oboogie wrote: ↑Tue Aug 25, 2026 9:56 pmIn absolute numbers, maybe, but try wrestling with the lack of social housing in an area blighted by over-tourism where NIMBY incomers will try and stop new housing estates using every delaying tactic available.Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Aug 25, 2026 7:35 pm That's why the debate in Scotland and Wales is different. There's not an alternative waiting to do that.But it's England where the need for social housing is greatest.
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2026 11:16 am Can the Assembly do anything about the planning rules? Even if they're changed, I guess it's also about money, which Wales doesn't have that much of.Parliament. Yes, planning is devolved aside from national interest and security matters (nuclear power stations and army bases, for example). It's also being addressed at the other end with unoccupied housing being compulsorily purchased and, of course, holiday home multipliers on Council Tax. Plaid have a lot more incentive to get this moving considering their heartlands are in very different areas to the previous Labour governments who seemed keen to say the right things and put the right structures in place, but drag their heels on implementation on the ground.
Burnham drops support for political funding cap aimed at curbing mega-donorsBurnham may be righ nowt, because some unions don't like the amendment and think it'll thwart their funding. Perhaps useless old Sir Keir had actually thought about this, and wasn't just refusing to do it because he was a continuity Thatcherite?
Billionaire Sports Direct founder Mike Ashley has criticised recent cost of living and retail policies from Andy Burnham as "populist reactions".
In a letter to the prime minister, the entrepreneur accused him of "jumping on 'everyday fixes' or bandwagons", while "disastrous" business rates policies and increases to the cost of employing workers were causing businesses to struggle.
He also described a previous proposal of increasing business rates on large warehouses to help reduce them for pubs and clubs as "delusional".
A Downing Street spokesperson said Burnham would "build a new economy that backs British business, delivers growth in every postcode and ensures the essentials in life - like energy, water and housing - are affordable again."
Promises including cutting VAT from household electricity bills and reducing business rates for some firms is "just the start", they added.
Earlier this month, Burnham promised to revitalise Britain's "hollowed out" high streets by helping councils block new vaping and betting shops.
He also brought forward a plan to end subscription traps and ban shops using misleading recommended retail prices, which can make it seem like discounts are larger than they really are.
In Ashley's letter, seen by the BBC and first reported by the Financial Times,, external he hit out at announcements made since Burnham succeeded Sir Keir Starmer as prime minister.
- By davidjay
Podcaster James English found guilty of domestic […]
