Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Boiler wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 2:02 pm If we'd had this at the turn of the last century Alan A. Jackson wouldn't have had anything to write a book* about.

Didn't know he was a writer, but he was very patient putting up with Carol and Bianca.

The A was probably added to avoid confusion with the country music star.

In fairness, it looks like the money will be going to charities in Lewisham. But looks like that isn't quite what he said before the election. I think he'd be advised to base the 20% donation on the original salary.

Bigger problem is that he's promised a load of council housing he isn't going to be able to deliver.

Q: There are 11,000 households in Lewisham on the waiting list for social housing, but we know that developers don’t want to build it. How are you going to address this?

A: I think we need to be tougher on developers and not accept a very low quantum of social housing.
The really obvious one is Lewisham Shopping Centre.
Any sort of objections or concerns around a development that only delivers 6% housing for social rent are interpreted by the Labour Party as being anti-homes and anti-development.

It's interpreted as being anti-homes and anti-development by me as well. I don't doubt that you can get them to increase the number of social homes if this is your only yardstick. But you'll lose other stuff in the development- it's very extensive, with student accommodation, key worker, London living rent housing, plus all the work building a new shopping centre. The balance seems broadly OK to me.