Do you want to discuss boring politics? (5 Viewers)

Forums New posts
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
MalcSB said:
BBC haven’t given the detail then, but even then it wasn’t an answer to the question. I should really bear in mind that Labour politicians are still politicians.
Click to expand...

I think the plans as given are a bit of a damp squib and won’t be enough to meet their targets but the devil will be in the detail.
 
P

PVA

Well-Known Member
Seems to me it's a case of pushing through 14k new homes that the previous government failed to do.

So day one on the job and they're already being proactive. That can only be a good thing surely.



Ms Reeves said: "We will create a new taskforce to accelerate stalled housing sites in our country. Beginning with Liverpool central docks, Worcester Parkway, Northstowe and Langley Sutton Coldfield - representing more than 14,000 homes."
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
MalcSB said:
The

The plan/ promise is to build 1,500,000 new homes over the next 5 years (parliament), not be be building at a rate of 300,000 per year (or 1.5 million per 5 years) by the end of that period.
What the Tories did is irrelevant. This is Labours target going forward and, presumably, does not rely on public funding to achieve.
Click to expand...
It’s not irrelevant, it shows the scale of the task. We’re building about 210K homes a year at the moment the Tories grew the annual house building figure by 900 last year. I do feel Labour are setting themselves up for a fall though as they’ve put all the emphasis on planning rules, it’s bigger than that. We have a skills shortage and a lot of building materials are still in short supply which in part explains the Tories failure. Although I suspect they were more interested in getting Starmer to explain what a woman is than increasing house building themselves. Although to be fair they did loosen restrictions on the immigration of the skills needed to build houses.

One thing Labour could do is make it easier for 16 year olds to work on building sites. My 16 year old nephew is currently doing a bricklaying course at college but struggles to get work experience as I think you have to be 18 to have a CSCS card to get on a building site and even then due to the cost of insurance a lot of contractors will only employ people over 21. He’s desperate to work when he’s not in college and has given up try to find reliable work with builders, he’s working at Sainsbury’s now when he isn’t at college.
 
MalcSB

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
PVA said:
Seems to me it's a case of pushing through 14k new homes that the previous government failed to do.

So day one on the job and they're already being proactive. That can only be a good thing surely.



Ms Reeves said: "We will create a new taskforce to accelerate stalled housing sites in our country. Beginning with Liverpool central docks, Worcester Parkway, Northstowe and Langley Sutton Coldfield - representing more than 14,000 homes."
Click to expand...
i will watch this with interest, but will not be holding my breath
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Clear as mud

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

Chancellor makes major Liverpool announcement in first speech

Rachel Reeves delivered her first speech as Chancellor on Monday
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk www.liverpoolecho.co.uk
Click to expand...

It was approved by the council so I'm assuming there are other things holding it up. I think it's probably Peel Holdings who applied for permission and they are politically savvy enough to realise that a Labour government is likely to be far more willing to contribute to the pre-construction works necessary in ex brownfield sites than the Tories are / were.
 
MalcSB

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
It’s not irrelevant, it shows the scale of the task. We’re building about 210K homes a year at the moment the Tories grew the annual house building figure by 900 last year. I do feel Labour are setting themselves up for a fall though as they’ve put all the emphasis on planning rules, it’s bigger than that. We have a skills shortage and a lot of building materials are still in short supply which in part explains the Tories failure. Although I suspect they were more interested in getting Starmer to explain what a woman is than increasing house building themselves. Although to be fair they did loosen restrictions on the immigration of the skills needed to build houses.

One thing Labour could do is make it easier for 16 year olds to work on building sites. My 16 year old nephew is currently doing a bricklaying course at college but struggles to get work experience as I think you have to be 18 to have a CSCS card to get on a building site and even then due to the cost of insurance a lot of contractors will only employ people over 21. He’s desperate to work when he’s not in college and has given up try to find reliable work with builders, he’s working at Sainsbury’s now when he isn’t at college.
Click to expand...
I sympathise with your nephew, must be very frustrating knowing what you want to do and not being allowed to do it.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
It’s the south east and Cambridge I really want to see bold action on. All due respect to Liverpool but house prices aren’t as much of an issue there as the south. The north needs better infrastructure as much as more houses imo.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
MalcSB said:
I sympathise with your nephew, must be very frustrating knowing what you want to do and not being allowed to do it.
Click to expand...
It is. I think and hope he’ll persevere as it’s a good trade to have and to be blunt he’s not academically minded but does have a practical mind that means he’s took to to it like a duck to water and if he does persevere he’ll earn a good living out of it. He’s a brute of a lad too, he’s looked like he’s in his 20’s from about the age of 14 so has the physical ability to be labouring for a gang of bricky’s now and learn his chosen trade while working in that environment as well as a couple of days at college.

I do wonder how many 16-18 year olds are dropping out of college because they’re only there a couple of days a week and then go and work somewhere like Sainsbury’s earning good money for people of their age.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
One thing Labour could do is make it easier for 16 year olds to work on building sites. My 16 year old nephew is currently doing a bricklaying course at college but struggles to get work experience as I think you have to be 18 to have a CSCS card to get on a building site and even then due to the cost of insurance a lot of contractors will only employ people over 21. He’s desperate to work when he’s not in college and has given up try to find reliable work with builders, he’s working at Sainsbury’s now when he isn’t at college.
Click to expand...

Been saying this since I taught. Met so many kids who just wanted to get on a learn a trade but were limited until they were 18 so we’re stuck doing Media Studies A-level or some nonsense. I’d like to see a proper route from 14 TBH. There must be some middle ground on safety legislation to let younger people get their foot in the door (probably not the best metaphor for reducing safety legislation)
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Been saying this since I taught. Met so many kids who just wanted to get on a learn a trade but were limited until they were 18 so we’re stuck doing Media Studies A-level or some nonsense. I’d like to see a proper route from 14 TBH. There must be some middle ground on safety legislation to let younger people get their foot in the door (probably not the best metaphor for reducing safety legislation)
Click to expand...
Certainly used to be allowed. When I left school at 16 none of my mates or myself went on to further education and we were all working in garages, on building sites etc at 16 full time on YTS’ except a day or 2 at college depending on what trade you were doing. Not sure why they changed it so dramatically. At least give 16 year olds the option because despite the bad press the youth get some do just want to get on with working.
 
M

Macca

Well-Known Member
MalcSB said:
The

The plan/ promise is to build 1,500,000 new homes over the next 5 years (parliament), not be be building at a rate of 300,000 per year (or 1.5 million per 5 years) by the end of that period.
What the Tories did is irrelevant. This is Labours target going forward and, presumably, does not rely on public funding to achieve.
Click to expand...

1.5 million?? Fucking hell
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top