Tories lose Chesham and Amersham

[GrizzlingGammon]

so push for amendments to the planning reform to force through development on permission, not use this as an excuse.

The planning reform is not fit purpose.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

As usual the window lickers are trying to pretend relaxing planning regulations which has aggravated many Tory MP's and contributed to the loss of a Tory safe seat is a cunning plan by Tories to supposedly appease their backers... :

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

 

[beorhthelm]

The planning reform is not fit purpose.

and the current planning system is?

we need reform, go with this or amend it. back to earlier point, we cant keep crying about lack of housing while doing nothing or blocking increased housing.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

and the current planning system is?

we need reform, go with this or amend it. back to earlier point, we cant keep crying about lack of housing while doing nothing or blocking increased housing.

The current system isn't perfect, but the reasons for change are not accurate. As I stated, but you seem to have forgotten, plenty of land with permission is available to build on now. Removing controls and implementing the new system will not change this. A system with 90% approvals, that has given permission for 1million homes that developers have not built. Why does that need sweeping reforms?

 

[The Clamp]

So, there are three groups of people that could potentially benefit from the reforms;

Rich people looking to buy property
Rich developers looking to sell property
People on low incomes looking to get on the property ladder

Hmmm. I wonder who’s best interests the Tory’s will be looking out for

 

[Westdene Seagull]

His first allegiance was always to John Bercow ........................... and the second, and the third ........................ No loss to the Tories, and I doubt he's broadly welcomed by Labour. If I was Keir Starmer, I'd politely ask him if he wouldn't rather join the Lib Dems, please!
Not that he's likely to get into Parliament again anyway.

This. You also have to question Labour's membershio selection process :

"One last question Mr Bercow, are you a sexist bully ?"
"Yes, yes I am."
"Fantastic. Welcome on board Mr Bercow."

 

[The Clamp]

The planning reform is not fit purpose.

I respectfully disagree. If, as I suspect, the plan is to sell of vast swathes of land for developers to either land bank or build expensive housing on, then it is very much fit for that purpose. It’s an ideal plan to enable that to happen.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I respectfully disagree. If, as I suspect, the plan is to sell of vast swathes of land for developers to either land bank or build expensive housing on, then it is very much fit for that purpose. It’s an ideal plan to enable that to happen.

You are jumping to conclusions that suit your politics and skewing the debate a little. It’s not quite as simple as you make out. I will give you an example. Where we used to live in Norfolk we had neighbours who live down a private track opposite our house. The farmer owns the track and they have a right of way. There is only one property about half a mile further up the track. In between there are some abandoned barns which the farmer has been trying to develop for a number of years into five small and quite affordable family houses. There is no indication that this could be turned into one large house (‘for the rich’). Our neighbours’ objection centers upon the traffic which will be using the track if the project is approved. Another neighbour who is a retired Council Planning Officer thinks that the new planning laws will lower the hurdle to the farmer’s development despite the traffic issues. It is a material change that alienates core Tory support which was my point. It isn’t a conspiracy, rather it is a material change in planning regulations that people will have different opinions on.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

You are jumping to conclusions that suit your politics and skewing the debate a little. It’s not quite as simple as you make out. I will give you an example. Where we used to live in Norfolk we had neighbours who live down a private track opposite our house. The farmer owns the track and they have a right of way. There is only one property about half a mile further up the track. In between there are some abandoned barns which the farmer has been trying to develop for a number of years into five small and quite affordable family houses. There is no indication that this could be turned into one large house (‘for the rich’). Our neighbours’ objection centers upon the traffic which will be using the track if the project is approved. Another neighbour who is a retired Council Planning Officer thinks that the new planning laws will lower the hurdle to the farmer’s development despite the traffic issues. It is a material change that alienates core Tory support which was my point. It isn’t a conspiracy, rather it is a material change in planning regulations that people will have different opinions on.

Why was it rejected? Dangerous access onto a public highway?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Why was it rejected? Dangerous access onto a public highway?

I did know the answer to this but the conversation was last year. I think it had more to do with the layers of permission needed and the ability of local residents to block development, both of which are about to reduce with the reforms. There was definitely an issue over access for emergency vehicles. I would ask my neighbour, but we have since moved. I don’t know whether the changes are a good or a bad thing but you can see why people who are directly affected may express their disapproval at the ballot box. That’s democracy.

 

[The Clamp]

I did know the answer to this but the conversation was last year. I think it had more to do with the layers of permission needed which are about to reduce with the reforms. There was definitely an issue over access for emergency vehicles. I would ask my neighbour, but we have since moved. I don’t know whether the changes are a good or a bad thing but you can see why people who are directly affected may express their disapproval at the ballot box. That’s democracy.

And I hope there are more small developments like your example. It’s what we need. However I fear the balance will tip in the favour of large estates with very little affordable housing.
If this government ever give me consistent reason to believe they do anything to benefit anyone but themselves, their chums and big business, I’d be delighted. I genuinely would. I’d rather like a reason to vote Tory again.
However the term Never Trust A Tory has never been more apt.
But we shall see.

 

[beorhthelm]

The current system isn't perfect, but the reasons for change are not accurate. As I stated, but you seem to have forgotten, plenty of land with permission is available to build on now. Removing controls and implementing the new system will not change this. A system with 90% approvals, that has given permission for 1million homes that developers have not built. Why does that need sweeping reforms?

i see, so cost of getting permission, years drawn out with outline permission, s106 cost arent problems and have no impact on stock or cost of housing. the system is OK, and the prices of land and housing is because of other unrelated issues. i suppose we'll just have to wait until a government change and there will be plenty of houses available.

 

[Randy McNob]

And I hope there are more small developments like your example. It’s what we need. However I fear the balance will tip in the favour of large estates with very little affordable housing.
If this government ever give me consistent reason to believe they do anything to benefit anyone but themselves, their chums and big business, I’d be delighted. I genuinely would. I’d rather like a reason to vote Tory again.
However the term Never Trust A Tory has never been more apt.
But we shall see.

Funny thing is, if you ask a Tory why they vote Tory they can't think of a reason either. It'll generaly be yeah but Labour, yeah but Corbyn.

Gaslit

 

[Baker lite]

Fair enough. He is a fanatical Remainer so the Labour Party is a good fit.

He will be being measured up for some ermine as we speak.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Funny thing is, if you ask a Tory why they vote Tory they can't think of a reason either. It'll generaly be yeah but Labour, yeah but Corbyn.

Gaslit

Going back 20 years, I had a friend who said he always voted Tory because “they know how to run things”. I often wonder what he would think now! I fear it would be no different, but he died so I can’t ask him.

 

[Chicken Run]

Going back 20 years, I had a friend who said he always voted Tory because “they know how to run things”. I often wonder what he would think now! I fear it would be no different, but he died so I can’t ask him.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ooooooooooh! Sarcasm!

You must have a strange understanding of what a “story” is!

 

[Chicken Run]

Ooooooooooh! Sarcasm!

You must have a strange understanding of what a “story” is!

Well I had this image in my head when I read it..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[The Clamp]

I keep getting told on here that I can’t have it both ways and I’m screaming for more housing. Hmm. I’m not.
We don’t have a housing crisis. We have an affordable housing crisis. Building 600 homes, on natural wetland, with each unit at a cost of £350’000 to £750,000 is not going to help. Letting developers off the hook by lowering affordable housing requirements is not going to solve the problem.
And it’s not nimbyism. I don’t want these monstrosities going up in anyone’s back yard, ruining protected sites and habitats irreversibly. It’s not a solution.
There are some that simply refuse to criticise this government. Yet I haven’t seen any of them on here that cited more affordable housing as a reason they voted Tory. I have a sneaking suspicion they simply don’t care about it but it’s an argument with a “loony lefty” so they’ll take it. Classy.

NB. I see this is now in the pit so I’ll make this my last contribution.

 

[Baker lite]

I keep getting told on here that I can’t have it both ways and I’m screaming for more housing. Hmm. I’m not.
We don’t have a housing crisis. We have an affordable housing crisis. Building 600 homes, on natural wetland, with each unit at a cost of £350’000 to £750,000 is not going to help. Letting developers off the hook by lowering affordable housing requirements is not going to solve the problem.
And it’s not nimbyism. I don’t want these monstrosities going up in anyone’s back yard, ruining protected sites and habitats irreversibly. It’s not a solution.
There are some that simply refuse to criticise this government. Yet I haven’t seen any of them on here that cited more affordable housing as a reason they voted Tory. I have a sneaking suspicion they simply don’t care about it but it’s an argument with a “loony lefty” so they’ll take it. Classy.

NB. I see this is now in the pit so I’ll make this my last contribution.

You will be back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk