LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

I see that the government is now floating the idea that fire safety checks on the asylum prison, sorry barge, are politically motivated. So both the fire service and the HSE are following a labour agenda by doing their jobs, on account of a "link" between the fire union and Labour.

To be fair the HSE said they were only concerned about safety on the dock side. The internal issue seems to be due to them now trying to double up on the original number it was supposed to take. Anyone would think their policy on small boats isn't working and they are having to accommodate more refugees / asylum seekers than anticipated.

On the basis that accommodation is needed I don't think the barge is that bad an idea. It looks a reasonable environment and the people housed there will apparently be free to come and go, it's probably a better solution then using hotels or old military camps but with the caveat that they use it in the way it was designed to be used and the onboard conditions are maintained.

My worry is that the fire service pointing out that fire doors are on wrong is seen as being a left wing agenda. It is beyond cynical.

Although I'm left leaning, I am all for balanced politics and vibrant debate in this country. The Tories are going down the same route as the Republicans in the US, with borderline disinformation. This means we cannot have that balance.

I don't know why, but the idea of lots of innocent people dying needlessly of smoke inhalation in a politically motivated fire really bothers me.

I don't disagree with any of that. The strategy is pretty obvious - the Fire Brigades Union is asking for talks therefore it is Leftie interference rather than a valid H&S concern by the organisation responsible for fire safety. The only bit I disagree with is that we are going down the Republican route. We started going down that route in 2016 and haven't stopped. I think they see how it has played out in the US as a success they want to emulate.

Depressing but probably true. Its a long road though and I fear there is a lot more they can do.

It is the same phenomenon, and the same reactionary drivers (the right-wing loss of institutions).

First.Aspect

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

Stevo_666

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

secretsqirrel

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

First.Aspect

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Thing is, because I'm not subject to the party whip, I don't feel compelled to agree with everything thst the party I am likely to vote for has in their manifesto.

For example, I'd like to have lower taxes overall, but agree that any taxation ought to be progressive, which might raise my personal tax burden, or lower it less.

So at the moment that makes me Labour with regard to overall taxation, but Labour with regard to progressive taxation.

See what I did there?

wallace_and_gromit

Pross said:

On the basis that accommodation is needed I don't think the barge is that bad an idea. It looks a reasonable environment and the people housed there will apparently be free to come and go...

IIRC, the Scottish Government accommodated Ukrainian refugees in an old cruise ship, so using a boat isn't an obviously bad idea as a concept. The devil is in the detail, as always.

rjsterry

wallace_and_gromit said:

Pross said:

On the basis that accommodation is needed I don't think the barge is that bad an idea. It looks a reasonable environment and the people housed there will apparently be free to come and go...

IIRC, the Scottish Government accommodated Ukrainian refugees in an old cruise ship, so using a boat isn't an obviously bad idea as a concept. The devil is in the detail, as always.

Boat is a stretch. Floating portacabins is more accurate. Still very on brand from the party that brought us Grenfell.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

pangolin said:

Stevo_666 said:

shirley_basso said:

Populist pandering. Outcome will be : no change.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66351785

You sure about that? There's a GE due by the end of next year and these issues are now known to shift the dial on voting.

Another vote winner announced by the geniuses at Tory HQ

It won enough votes in Uxbridge.

In a by-election. Good performance in those doesn't translate into GE performance as the Lib Dems amply demonstrate.

It was a decent indicator of issues that can shift the dial on voting patterns.

Just managing your expectations 🙂. You must remember the opposition to Heathrow expansion, which is still a big issue in west London and how that turned out in Richmond.

The descent into Lib Dems just being a part of local NIMBYs has really put me off. A lot.

Will check the local MP's track record on this in the election and if it's the same story I probably won't vote Lib Dem for the first time.

Locally, the arguments are:

"No, *we're* going to save the local hospital* (which is literally sinking into the ground)

And ULEZ bandwagon jumping.

The current MP's main occupation seems to be judging Christmas card competitions and posting Instagram pictures of him 'out and about'.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

pangolin said:

Stevo_666 said:

shirley_basso said:

Populist pandering. Outcome will be : no change.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66351785

You sure about that? There's a GE due by the end of next year and these issues are now known to shift the dial on voting.

Another vote winner announced by the geniuses at Tory HQ

It won enough votes in Uxbridge.

In a by-election. Good performance in those doesn't translate into GE performance as the Lib Dems amply demonstrate.

It was a decent indicator of issues that can shift the dial on voting patterns.

Just managing your expectations 🙂. You must remember the opposition to Heathrow expansion, which is still a big issue in west London and how that turned out in Richmond.

The descent into Lib Dems just being a part of local NIMBYs has really put me off. A lot.

Will check the local MP's track record on this in the election and if it's the same story I probably won't vote Lib Dem for the first time.

Locally, the arguments are:

"No, *we're* going to save the local hospital* (which is literally sinking into the ground)

And ULEZ bandwagon jumping.

The current MP's main occupation seems to be judging Christmas card competitions and posting Instagram pictures of him 'out and about'.

Right.

Our local council lib dem efforts seems relatively pro housing development (with caveats of course) and pro the water treatment facility (with caveats, of course).

However, one of the local campaigns is to save the Grafton centre, which is basically an 80s style shopping mall which, unsurprisingly, has seen a pretty massive decline over the past 10 years.

Walk in and I'd say around 1/3 to half of the units are just vacant, and have been for some time. It's a ghost town in there.

The latest owners have bought it with a view to redeveloping it largely for offices and labs (latter of which are in short supply around here). Sounds great.

No apparently not, the LDs want to keep it as it was.

from the outside, the Grafton area is regarded as the city's secondary destination shopping centre, but for the residential community of the Kite and Brunswick areas, it includes their neighbourhood shops, in a way the historic centre never would. There is a huge loyalty to many of these shops. Residents recall the shops' support to them during the pandemic. It would be very upsetting if this was to be broken up by the new corporate owners.

It's like they've never been in it. "huge loyalty to many of these shops". News to me, they're all threatening to close.

(I should add, the current owners bought it at 50% loss off LGIM, which gives you an idea of the decay that's happened there).

Pross

rjsterry said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

Pross said:

On the basis that accommodation is needed I don't think the barge is that bad an idea. It looks a reasonable environment and the people housed there will apparently be free to come and go...

IIRC, the Scottish Government accommodated Ukrainian refugees in an old cruise ship, so using a boat isn't an obviously bad idea as a concept. The devil is in the detail, as always.

Boat is a stretch. Floating portacabins is more accurate. Still very on brand from the party that brought us Grenfell.

Accommodation wise is it any worse than those serving in the Royal Navy have? The sleeping space looks larger if anything.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

pangolin said:

Stevo_666 said:

shirley_basso said:

Populist pandering. Outcome will be : no change.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66351785

You sure about that? There's a GE due by the end of next year and these issues are now known to shift the dial on voting.

Another vote winner announced by the geniuses at Tory HQ

It won enough votes in Uxbridge.

In a by-election. Good performance in those doesn't translate into GE performance as the Lib Dems amply demonstrate.

It was a decent indicator of issues that can shift the dial on voting patterns.

Just managing your expectations 🙂. You must remember the opposition to Heathrow expansion, which is still a big issue in west London and how that turned out in Richmond.

The descent into Lib Dems just being a part of local NIMBYs has really put me off. A lot.

Will check the local MP's track record on this in the election and if it's the same story I probably won't vote Lib Dem for the first time.

Locally, the arguments are:

"No, *we're* going to save the local hospital* (which is literally sinking into the ground)

And ULEZ bandwagon jumping.

The current MP's main occupation seems to be judging Christmas card competitions and posting Instagram pictures of him 'out and about'.

Right.

Our local council lib dem efforts seems relatively pro housing development (with caveats of course) and pro the water treatment facility (with caveats, of course).

However, one of the local campaigns is to save the Grafton centre, which is basically an 80s style shopping mall which, unsurprisingly, has seen a pretty massive decline over the past 10 years.

Walk in and I'd say around 1/3 to half of the units are just vacant, and have been for some time. It's a ghost town in there.

The latest owners have bought it with a view to redeveloping it largely for offices and labs (latter of which are in short supply around here). Sounds great.

No apparently not, the LDs want to keep it as it was.

from the outside, the Grafton area is regarded as the city's secondary destination shopping centre, but for the residential community of the Kite and Brunswick areas, it includes their neighbourhood shops, in a way the historic centre never would. There is a huge loyalty to many of these shops. Residents recall the shops' support to them during the pandemic. It would be very upsetting if this was to be broken up by the new corporate owners.

It's like they've never been in it. "huge loyalty to many of these shops". News to me, they're all threatening to close.

(I should add, the current owners bought it at 50% loss off LGIM, which gives you an idea of the decay that's happened there).

That has to be infuriating, because if you create another reason for people to be there, you create a flow of customers for the remaining shops.

The alternative is oxfam, Ladbrooks, specsavers and Greg's, which a shopping destination does not make. If you are lucky there'll be a lidl.

Stevo_666

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

kingstongraham

Here's the full text of what they say.

https://www.cambridgelibdems.org.uk/protectgraftonshopping

They want to keep a food shop (and Greggs).

Pross

kingstongraham said:

Here's the full text of what they say.

https://www.cambridgelibdems.org.uk/protectgraftonshopping

They want to keep a food shop (and Greggs).

Much of what they say seems to reflect what Rick was saying so I'm not sure what the issue is:

Cllr Bick said:

“Given the general state of the high street, it's probably unavoidable that a centre like this one undergoes change. The large number of vacant shopfronts underlines the point, and if nothing is done there will be a downward spiral from which it is difficult to rescue much at all.

"We don’t have a problem in principle with new uses such as laboratory workspace for start-ups and more mature businesses, so long as their activities don’t conflict with surrounding residential areas. In principle this could help to make a reduced number of retail shops viable. It would be appealing for employees coming to work in these new spaces to have a range of convenience shops.

“But it's vital that there is some sensible joined up thinking about what is retained. From the outside, the Grafton area is regarded as the city's secondary destination shopping centre, but for the residential community of the Kite and Brunswick areas, it includes their neighbourhood shops, in a way the historic centre never would. There is a huge loyalty to many of these shops. Residents recall the shops' support to them during the pandemic. It would be very upsetting if this was to be broken up by the new corporate owners.

“We think there is an identity of interest between the local neighbourhood and the workforce of the new laboratories. Both need convenience and household shopping and both together have the purchasing power to continue to make such shops viable and attractive to retailers.

“It is terrible that the government’s deregulation of planning means that a change of use from retailing to laboratory workspace no longer requires any planning permission, so we are fighting our campaign with one hand tied behind our backs. All we have is persuasion. Initial meetings suggest that the owners are willing to listen and co-operate, but this is early days. Our petition is a means of demonstrating the support there is for household and food convenience shopping within the centre, which will help our discussions with the new owners."

Depending how much money the developers are looking to throw at the scheme it would seem in their interests to try to retain the well used retail, maybe creating new units for them if their existing locations are a key part of the redevelopment proposals. If only the idea that the Government has deregulated planning and made it easier to gain planning consent were as clear ct as that statement suggests though!

rjsterry

I see one of the quarterwit 2019 backbenchers is outraged that people with no resources can access legal aid at government prescribed rates to appeal their conviction for murder. Legal aid is only to be used for indolent ex-politicians with poor digital security practices.

shirley_basso

The large area circled poorly is the existing dedicated shopping centre which is basically a disaster and what I think is being converted. It has a couple of shops I would be sad to lose (Entertainer (only toy shop in cambs), Boots (very convenient location) and Decathlon (just because) ) but otherwise it's not a great place to go.

The shops around the outside, however, are generally pretty good independent delis, some great italian and asian ones - however they are in traditional high street style shops / separate buildings to the Grafton Centre so I don't see how the redevelopment would change them at all.

Sure it has some crap (poundland and primark) but do does everywhere.



Existing Waitrose (and Greggs adjacent - circled) would presumably be unaffected.

New plans below.




Basically everything he is whinging about doesn't really change anyway. What a moron.

kingstongraham

shirley_basso said:

The large area circled poorly is the existing dedicated shopping centre which is basically a disaster and what I think is being converted. It has a couple of shops I would be sad to lose (Entertainer (only toy shop in cambs), Boots (very convenient location) and Decathlon (just because) ) but otherwise it's not a great place to go.

The shops around the outside, however, are generally pretty good independent delis, some great italian and asian ones - however they are in traditional high street style shops / separate buildings to the Grafton Centre so I don't see how the redevelopment would change them at all (that said I haven't see any plans).

Sure it has some censored (poundland and primark) but do does everywhere.



Existing Waitrose (and Greggs adjacent - circled) would presumably be unaffected.

From the link above - I don't know any details at all: "The change has come into focus from Brydell’s planning application for the 2-14 Fitzroy Street block, revealing that they intend to replace two popular existing shops, Greggs and Waitrose with laboratory workspace."

Stevo_666

Greggs is always worth saving.

shirley_basso

kingstongraham said:

shirley_basso said:

The large area circled poorly is the existing dedicated shopping centre which is basically a disaster and what I think is being converted. It has a couple of shops I would be sad to lose (Entertainer (only toy shop in cambs), Boots (very convenient location) and Decathlon (just because) ) but otherwise it's not a great place to go.

The shops around the outside, however, are generally pretty good independent delis, some great italian and asian ones - however they are in traditional high street style shops / separate buildings to the Grafton Centre so I don't see how the redevelopment would change them at all (that said I haven't see any plans).

Sure it has some censored (poundland and primark) but do does everywhere.



Existing Waitrose (and Greggs adjacent - circled) would presumably be unaffected.

From the link above - I don't know any details at all: "The change has come into focus from Brydell’s planning application for the 2-14 Fitzroy Street block, revealing that they intend to replace two popular existing shops, Greggs and Waitrose with laboratory workspace."

Fair enough - but the two huge commercial units opposite Waitrose and Greggs are vacant.

I've edited my previous post to include the new plans (as at Mar-23) which don't show that change.

shirley_basso

Most of the complaints are pretty fair, tbh - there is absolutely shedloads of lab space elsewhere in the very local area with much better transport links.

While it does need to be knocked down and rebuilt, having a bit of character would do it no harm - and that extortionate rents are what's keeping the high street from flourishing as most craft fairs are generally rammed in Cambridge, with most people (not me, sadly) extremely well off and lots of disposable income.

secretsqirrel

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

I agree, I certainly don’t have the stomach to doggedly keep defending the indefensible.

Stevo_666

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

I agree, I certainly don’t have the stomach to doggedly keep defending the indefensible.

If the majority of this forum get their political wishes, I'll be doing the attacking, not the defending. Combined with that potential election outcome making me even busier than usual, it's going to be a case of so much leftiebollox, so little time

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

I agree, I certainly don’t have the stomach to doggedly keep defending the indefensible.

If the majority of this forum get their political wishes, I'll be doing the attacking, not the defending. Combined with that potential election outcome making me even busier than usual, it's going to be a case of so much leftiebollox, so little time

Seems more like more of the same but with less bollox about small boats and Brexit.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

I agree, I certainly don’t have the stomach to doggedly keep defending the indefensible.

If the majority of this forum get their political wishes, I'll be doing the attacking, not the defending. Combined with that potential election outcome making me even busier than usual, it's going to be a case of so much leftiebollox, so little time

Seems more like more of the same but with less bollox about small boats and Brexit.

Let's wait and see exactly how Labour balls things up if they get in.

pangolin

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

I agree, I certainly don’t have the stomach to doggedly keep defending the indefensible.

If the majority of this forum get their political wishes, I'll be doing the attacking, not the defending. Combined with that potential election outcome making me even busier than usual, it's going to be a case of so much leftiebollox, so little time

Out of interest what would that attack look like if, say, Keir Starmer announced he was buying the country 100 sets of snakes and ladders.

wallace_and_gromit

Pross said:

kingstongraham said:

Here's the full text of what they say.

https://www.cambridgelibdems.org.uk/protectgraftonshopping

They want to keep a food shop (and Greggs).

Much of what they say seems to reflect what Rick was saying so I'm not sure what the issue is:

Cllr Bick said:

“Given the general state of the high street, it's probably unavoidable that a centre like this one undergoes change. The large number of vacant shopfronts underlines the point, and if nothing is done there will be a downward spiral from which it is difficult to rescue much at all.

"We don’t have a problem in principle with new uses such as laboratory workspace for start-ups and more mature businesses, so long as their activities don’t conflict with surrounding residential areas. In principle this could help to make a reduced number of retail shops viable. It would be appealing for employees coming to work in these new spaces to have a range of convenience shops.

“But it's vital that there is some sensible joined up thinking about what is retained. From the outside, the Grafton area is regarded as the city's secondary destination shopping centre, but for the residential community of the Kite and Brunswick areas, it includes their neighbourhood shops, in a way the historic centre never would. There is a huge loyalty to many of these shops. Residents recall the shops' support to them during the pandemic. It would be very upsetting if this was to be broken up by the new corporate owners.

“We think there is an identity of interest between the local neighbourhood and the workforce of the new laboratories. Both need convenience and household shopping and both together have the purchasing power to continue to make such shops viable and attractive to retailers.

“It is terrible that the government’s deregulation of planning means that a change of use from retailing to laboratory workspace no longer requires any planning permission, so we are fighting our campaign with one hand tied behind our backs. All we have is persuasion. Initial meetings suggest that the owners are willing to listen and co-operate, but this is early days. Our petition is a means of demonstrating the support there is for household and food convenience shopping within the centre, which will help our discussions with the new owners."

Depending how much money the developers are looking to throw at the scheme it would seem in their interests to try to retain the well used retail, maybe creating new units for them if their existing locations are a key part of the redevelopment proposals. If only the idea that the Government has deregulated planning and made it easier to gain planning consent were as clear ct as that statement suggests though!

The problem is that these "change of use" issues only arise once the retail facility has ceased to be financially viable. Retail was going down the pan as a commercial property class (other than the genuinely prime sites) pre-pandemic due to the gradual shift to online retail, and habits changed further during the pandemic. Now there's the cost of living crisis suppressing appetite for discretionary retail and higher interest rates, which would have rendered a lot of retail facilities non-viable, even without any of the other issues.

For a lot of retail facilities, having any kind of willing buyer for the site, regardless of the ultimate use (so long as it's legal, obviously) is actually a pretty decent position at the moment, and trying to force new owners to continue some retail operations without a major financial inducement will most likely lead to there no longer being a willing buyer. This is not a sellers' market.

That said, if you don't ask, you don't get, and a much reduced retail offering in a developed site may be viable.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

secretsqirrel said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

One of the other effects is supporters doubling down and defending the indefensible.

#stevo

In your humble opinion.

If Labour get in I'll have fun seeing how much leftiebollox you're prepared to defend

Not sure anyone will be able to match your commitment.

Nobody in this forum at least.

I agree, I certainly don’t have the stomach to doggedly keep defending the indefensible.

If the majority of this forum get their political wishes, I'll be doing the attacking, not the defending. Combined with that potential election outcome making me even busier than usual, it's going to be a case of so much leftiebollox, so little time

Seems more like more of the same but with less bollox about small boats and Brexit.

Let's wait and see exactly how Labour balls things up if they get in.

Indeed. I'm sure there are new and inventive ways that we haven't even imagined. Seems pretty much a fait accompli though.

rick_chasey

https://twitter.com/yougov/status/1686760950039183362?s=46&t=Q7O5dnx-0MXQv9qE3vz1vg

Half of people think that those on benefit shouldn’t necessarily be able to afford to “rent a house or flat”

rick_chasey

Meanwhile core Uk inflation is higher than the EM country average

pangolin

rick_chasey said:

Half of people think that those on benefit shouldn’t necessarily be able to afford to “rent a house or flat”

38% don't think people on minimum wage should be able to afford to rent a house or flat either.

That can't be right?

1% think only the wealthiest should be able to afford haircuts