Labour - party of building?

vegansrock

Maybe they should introduce some policies to bring homes that are deliberately left empty are brought into public ownership. Ownership of property by foreign investors and just left unoccupied should be prohibited.

Would this include peoples holiday homes?

What about homes where the owner has died and the families decide what to do?

The properties owned by foreign investors are so far out of reach for all but the top 5% of the U.K. what difference would it make for any Government to compulsory purchase them? Who could afford to live in them even if they were converted into apartments?

allsorts I simply don’t recognise your description of the Labour Party

GG13 It's not true that all properties owned by foreign investors are incredibly expensive. Apparently, a number of commercial retail outlets in my town are owned by foreign landlords. They're part of much bigger portfolios and are bought and sold as commodities and the end result is that retailers can't afford the increasing rents. The landlords themselves couldn't care less about the businesses. To them, the properties are just words on a balance sheet of assets and investments.

growstuff

GG13 It's not true that all properties owned by foreign investors are incredibly expensive. Apparently, a number of commercial retail outlets in my town are owned by foreign landlords. They're part of much bigger portfolios and are bought and sold as commodities and the end result is that retailers can't afford the increasing rents. The landlords themselves couldn't care less about the businesses. To them, the properties are just words on a balance sheet of assets and investments.

Commercial property is totally different to expensive empty homes.

Our town centre is dead. There are buildings that could be converted into apartments.
We have many old mills, engineering, manufacturing buildings. Demolish and build there. Leave our remaining green belt alone.

Council housing and housing association properties need to be prioritised.

Iam64

Our town centre is dead. There are buildings that could be converted into apartments.
We have many old mills, engineering, manufacturing buildings. Demolish and build there. Leave our remaining green belt alone.

Council housing and housing association properties need to be prioritised.

Definitely a better option than building on green belt land which I am vehemently opposed to.

I do have a problem with blanket compulsory purchasing though.

Much of the commercial property, hotels, retail parks, distribution centers are owned by international investors, because they know it’s a secure investment, we are always going to need that infrastructure.

Residential is much more difficult because of regulation and taxation issues

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GG13 It's not true that all properties owned by foreign investors are incredibly expensive. Apparently, a number of commercial retail outlets in my town are owned by foreign landlords. They're part of much bigger portfolios and are bought and sold as commodities and the end result is that retailers can't afford the increasing rents. The landlords themselves couldn't care less about the businesses. To them, the properties are just words on a balance sheet of assets and investments.

Commercial property is totally different to expensive empty homes.

Sorry, I don't understand the essential difference.

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GG13 It's not true that all properties owned by foreign investors are incredibly expensive. Apparently, a number of commercial retail outlets in my town are owned by foreign landlords. They're part of much bigger portfolios and are bought and sold as commodities and the end result is that retailers can't afford the increasing rents. The landlords themselves couldn't care less about the businesses. To them, the properties are just words on a balance sheet of assets and investments.

Commercial property is totally different to expensive empty homes.

Sorry, I don't understand the essential difference.

Commercial and/or retail units are not necessarily sited where people want to live and have a different usage category which isn’t always possible to change. It is often cheaper to demolish and rebuild rather than refurbish or repurpose.

If the units are empty it could be down to a myriad of reasons particularly retail as the way we shop has changed especially post Covid.

Homes/houses are just that homes, whether they are permanently lived in or not is down to whoever owns them. I for one do not want to live in a Country that can decide to compulsory purchase any home because in their opinion it is empty

Are we going to have legislation on how many days/nights we have to spend at home, how long we leave a home empty whilst deciding whether to sell, rent, rebuild or refurbish?

Larger homes have to apply for change of usage to be converted into apartments or HMO’s , and that’s when Health & Safety get involved, it is far from easy or cheap to do so legitimately and to the correct standard.

I would really like to believe all the current Labour Party advertisements, but I can’t. I’m from a working class family and was born in a very deprived area. The allocation of a decent sized council house near a good primary school when I was very young gave me and my siblings a shove up the ladder. I have voted Labour all my life but I really can’t trust them anymore.

I am pleased to see how well Reeves speech has been received, from economists, businesses, and the party. I noted she nodded towards Bidenomics which of course is expansionist in approach and has successfully grown the US economy since covid.

Reeves has economics running through her blood of course and it is clear that she has the strength and will to tackle what is a shattered economy.

If Labour are lucky enough to win the election🤞🤞🤞 she will be the first female chancellor for 800 years.

Cadenza I totally agree. Around here there has been massive house building in the last 10 years. Green fields gobbled up by the hectare. The latest development still has at least 50% of the houses unsold, standing empty.

Meanwhile the traffic chaos has to be seen to be believed. So I’m not sure about this Labour policy at all.

However, what is really going to lose them my vote is the way they are treating people like Jamie Driscoll and others. Starmer can’t cope with diversity. A weak man.

Starmer is apparently going to say in his speech this afternoon (amongst a lot else) that he intends Labour to devolve the biggest level of power ever to towns and cities. Taking it in effect away from the Westminster bubble.

So devolved towns and cities will have the same powers granted to them as Manchester etc.

It’s his other idea for ‘power’ ie energy that I’m really interested in. I do like the idea of creating a national energy company making us self-sustaining on renewable electricity.

That should appeal to the Brexiteers! But it does make good economic sense.

Whitewavemark2

Starmer is apparently going to say in his speech this afternoon (amongst a lot else) that he intends Labour to devolve the biggest level of power ever to towns and cities. Taking it in effect away from the Westminster bubble.

So devolved towns and cities will have the same powers granted to them as Manchester etc.

Another way of saying Labour doesn’t want the hassle, let’s give it to someone else…

GrannyGravy13

Whitewavemark2

Starmer is apparently going to say in his speech this afternoon (amongst a lot else) that he intends Labour to devolve the biggest level of power ever to towns and cities. Taking it in effect away from the Westminster bubble.

So devolved towns and cities will have the same powers granted to them as Manchester etc.

Another way of saying Labour doesn’t want the hassle, let’s give it to someone else…

Totally disagree. people have been complaining for years that they are governed from Westminster who have little idea of what is happening. Devolving power to cities will give people more say in what happens to their local area.

ronib

I find Mark Carney’s endorsement of Rachael Reeves a bit disconcerting. It feels as if the Bank of England is only interested in maintaining standard orthodox banking practices and it suggests that Rachael Reeves is definitely one of their own. A safe pair of hands for the Bank. When Labour says the country needs a better growth strategy, that is acceptable to the Bank but when the Conservatives offer the same policy, the reaction is not positively received. Or have I misunderstood?

I feel the same concern about Rachel Reeves.

Massive house building in the South already, don’t know about the North?
Def need more social housing tho.
Was horrified to see people demonstrating outside the conference shouting about the Palestinian cause after what just happened in Israel to innocent civilians.Also horrified by the unisex toilets and women having to go into them, what are Labour doing giving in to the trans lobby in this way? Why not have mens and womens toilets and a couple of unisex ones?

There are unisex lavatories everywhere now - it has become the norm. No one takes any notice do they?

Even in a little new forest town the lavatories were unisex and I would have expected what is almost a very conservative (small c) population to dislike the idea, but there seemed to be zero problems - people pottering in and out, men holding the door for the women etc. all very civilised.

They have apparently had a quick re think when the issue was pointed out to them.

Ilovecheese

ronib

I find Mark Carney’s endorsement of Rachael Reeves a bit disconcerting. It feels as if the Bank of England is only interested in maintaining standard orthodox banking practices and it suggests that Rachael Reeves is definitely one of their own. A safe pair of hands for the Bank. When Labour says the country needs a better growth strategy, that is acceptable to the Bank but when the Conservatives offer the same policy, the reaction is not positively received. Or have I misunderstood?

I feel the same concern about Rachel Reeves.

I have my concerns about Reeves, too, but when I looked at her speech she is talking a lot about investing in public services. That alone would provide a boost to the economy and would help the private sector because, as I keep pointing out, the public sector gets all its goods and services from the private sector and public sector employees spend their wages in the private sector.

Then there is housebuilding and investment in green energy. It all adds up to more money in the economy and more incentive for private investment.

From eonomist, Simon Wren Lewis', blog today:

The government does not invest enough, and partly as a result the private sector does not invest enough. As this excellent report from the Resolution Foundation’s Felicia Odamtten & James Smith shows, public and private sector investment are complements; the former encourages the latter. This chart from the report shows that UK public investment is consistently below the international average, and that average includes many countries that have underinvested over the last two decades like Germany and the US.

Interesting that Reeve's focus was on 'trickle down doesn't work'. Which is correct, but I'm still not sure if she still thinks that the government can't spend until increases its tax take. Because it won't increase its tax take until it does spend..

What 'same policy' have the tories offered, ronib?

www.ukpol.co.uk/rachel-reeves-2022-speech-to-labour-party-conference/

Sorry, I should have linked to the Wren Lewis blog, too.

mainlymacro.blogspot.com/

MaizieD something beginning with G ….
GROWTH
I refer of course to the famous delivery of one Liz Truss and an apparent attempt to start a 60 strong growth Conservative sub group/breakaway group etc very recently.
As we have all lived through an unprecedented time starting mostly with we believe in unicorns under BJ, I think some cynicism is to be expected…..

All governments want growth, ronib. The problem with Truss was that, beyond cutting taxed for the rich, she didn't actually say how her government would promote it. Just giving more money to the wealthy isn't gong to do it...

Labour has outlined areas in which they will invest for growth all though the conference.

Whitewavemark2

There are unisex lavatories everywhere now - it has become the norm. No one takes any notice do they?

Even in a little new forest town the lavatories were unisex and I would have expected what is almost a very conservative (small c) population to dislike the idea, but there seemed to be zero problems - people pottering in and out, men holding the door for the women etc. all very civilised.

I don’t think you get it.
Not talking about the single person loos you sometimes find, but large toilets with a black curtain covering the urinals and a few cubicle loos.Women have to walk past the curtain and find wet floors and toilet seats and dirty loos.It’s not on
Glad they realised their mistake tho as Galaxy says.Guess it won’t happen again.