Labour - party of building?

growstuff

Well said Caravansera.

Here here!

Margaret Thatcher was the person who started the rot by buying voter s by selling council houses cheaply and we live to regret it. We desperately need affordable houses and not affordable by london standards either, but correct for the local area. As a young girl I lived with my family in a semi detached council house that was just what we still need now. It had 3 bedrooms, an upstairs bathroom - no central heating in those days. pantry and so forth, from the back door there was a little brick roof across to the adjoining building. There were 3 doors there. One was an outside toilet - brilliant when you were in muddy boots gardening, or the children were playing in the garden. No need to traipse across the carpets to go upstairs.Another door was into the coal shed and the third larger room held the electric copper for clothes washing, bikes gardening tools etc. There was a front and back garden and the back was not a postage stamp but enough to grow fruit and veg and the majority did grow their own food and were able to share out and swop with other gardeners, so that you could make you family quite self sufficient in fruit veg flowers etc, and we swapped with neighbours too. i lived for 20 + years in Richmond , very happily in my house with a garden on 3 levels. grew many things was quite self sufficent in things and made great use of garden especially my lovely old victoria plum tree which I used to make jam,freeze the fruit, give some to neighbours etc etc. I did hospital car volunteer service for 10 years 3 days a week, and then drove the Little white Bus up Swaledale. Now with many health problems including cancer I have had to move to a ground floor flat .elsewhere There has been very little choice and the prices for bungalows are totally outside what I could afford. But there are many people like me now, catch 22. Not enough suitable accommodation for pensioners. Few bungalows or g round floor accommodation, leading to pensioners not being able to move , blocking what would be the first time buyers houses. Regarding building, all the blasted politicians should have to put their money where their mouth is and have a sensible plan not bits and bobs. NO house or flat should now be allowed to be built without the best insulation and triple or at least double glazing ( and a decent space between the glass also keeps noise pollution down) No good telling people to go electric with their car etc when they are letting jerry built poor new stuff be set up which will be nonsustainable in a few year. Then I do not like draconian measures , but think that no green areas should be built on when there is available properties that could be updated re insulation etc and all the vacant properties within a town or city should be used before they look at building another new place. One great thing that was done in the past as my grandparents were involved in it. A council that used its brain to help everyone. There were quite a lot of now pensioners, who had been in the 2nd world war and come back with various injuries etc and had moved into these council properties and stayed their over the years., building friendships and helping each other out where possible. Their families grew up and moved away, but the remaining people left in the 3 bed properties were mostly pensioners sometimes living alone.It is not just the buildings but they had built up a community amongst themselves and helped each other. So someone with a brain and a care about the social situation came up with a great idea. I think it was 12 bungalows were built in amongst the area of the houses. Then the group was asked if they would like to move so that literally everyone moved to these bungalows but were still next door to those they had been with before. A brilliant result. Those people remained a part of that community, but now with more manageable places, easy to heat and keep clean etc and your neighbour was your neighbour still. That gave 12 3 bed properties for families that needed the space. The bungalows even in that long ago time were built with more efficient windows and doors , were safer etc So the meeting was held to make sure that the people moving to the bungalows were happy to be beside their previous neighbour (doesnt always work out , can be a good chance to move to a slightly different one) Then everyone helped them to move and sort out sutff to get rid of. The council workmen then went into the empty houses and did whatever jobs were needed. An empty house and adjacant properties allowed them to move much quicker. Once checked over and swept out, the new tenants could move in, confident that their house would not need repairs done immediately. Now that is what you call intelligent organisation and effiecncy. It is what we want now. Where there are properties becoming neglected and derelict, the owners should be given a reasonable time to sort it but if they were just being greedy and keeping it to make more money, then the council should charge them double or triple the council tax for leaving it without an occupier, without a genuine reason - such as subsidence or something. If this did not work the council should compulsory purchase the property , do it up and provide suitable accommodation for those in desperate need.So I do not want to see or hear any politican of any party making kudos for themselves over this. Another very simple thing that could be easy to do and I dont know why it has not been done is quite simple. All politicians should be recorded speaking about their promises and plans. They are collected together and a file set up. Then in the future anyone could look at this file and see exactly what they said and what they promised. This would give us all immediate access to preciscly what the actually did say. The politicans would be hoist by their own petard if they did nothing or actually went against what they had said whilst electioneering. As we say , there are lies, damn lies, and politicans. But we would then have their own words to confront them with when they wriggled out of promises and spent our money on their own agendas instead of doing what any intelligent person would do. I dont trust a word any of them say, but ha ha! Maybe those of us who live in the north may have the last laugh. Too much has been about london centred ideas etc, but if the world continues to heat up ( and by the lack of effort so far ) it will become much better and more desirable to live up here than down south as our climat will then be the pleasant one and they will be too hot!!!!! Oh and while I am about it all houses should have a rainwater butt attached to the drainpipes, saving water for the garden to be avilable when needed. Oh just give me 3 wishes or let me become a dictator here for a couple of years and watch me sort it!!!!

I am still worrying about the national debt- approaching £3 trillion. Premium bonds held £121 billion.

growstuff

Well said Caravansera.

I'd echo that.

And, thank you for pointing out what I have often said before when people start worrying about the 'national debt'. Those premium bonds are part of it; people don't actually want repayment of their bonds 😄

Well said Caravansera.

I agree with you that not all commercial buildings are suitable, but some are.

The empty shops in my nearby market town are too few and too small to be of interest for conversion to residential. It is, however, happening with empty department stores in the nearest city. The planning laws have already been relaxed by the Conservatives to assist this - but not every empty commercial unit is suitable for conversion.

Oreo

What’s really needed are new towns to be built. That way the infrastructure and council houses as well as houses to buy, doctors dentists libraries town hall, shops and so on are all factored in the planning.

I agree with Oreo. We need to build new towns to include thousands of new rental homes to put right the wrong that Thatcher’s Right to Buy has caused. The land is there. Relatively little of the UK is actually built on - see BBC’s Mark Easton’s reports on just how little of the UK is urban. Note that urban isn't the same as built on. In urban England, researchers found that just over half the land (54%) in our towns and cities is greenspace - parks, allotments, sports pitches and so on.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41901294

Currently, there are about 28 million dwellings in the UK. We could increase that by say 5 million and not see much of a dent in other habitats.

After the financial crash of 2008, people with capital were struggling to find a return on their money. It triggered the buy to let market, people using their capital or borrowing very cheaply to buy up property when prices had plummeted as a result of the crash.

At the time, I advocated for government bonds to fund the building of new rental homes. The public already loan the government 121 billion in Premium Bonds alone which is about 5% of the national debt. It currently pays out 4.65% p.a. around 5.6 billion in prizes but is distributed very unequally.

It may seem very simplistic but I’d certainly invest in government bonds with a modest guaranteed return if it was also guaranteed that that capital would be used to fund the building of new towns and affordable homes. Think of the jobs it would create and the tax revenues that would come from that. Governments bang on about growth and you don't get that unless more people are economically productive.

Currently, we struggle to find skilled labour but any plan the develop new towns wouldn’t happen overnight and that gives time to train another generation in construction skills as well as the jobs that new town infrastructire would create. The acquisition of land and planning would be fraught with problems but governments with vision have done it before. We had massive programmes of council house building between the two world wars and after WW2 it as well as new towns. Why can’t we do it again?

Casdon

Purpose built industrial units may not be suitable for conversion, and given that we aren’t going to see a return of the traditional high street in many places, presumably there is also the option to knock them down and rebuild suitable housing, I believe that’s what Labour are saying.
My nearest town is a traditional market town, and from what you’ve said previously GSM I think yours probably is too. The buildings here are Georgian and Victorian, mainly three storey, with shops on the ground floor. There is capacity to convert more of them from commercial to shared or purely residential use.

That’s what’s happening in my town many old style shops are changing to Restaurants, Cafes, convenience shops etc with residential above, also new apartment blocks are being built within walking distance of the town centre. Along with pedestrianized areas it’s really a big improvement, most of the town centre is owned by the Town Trust so there is a large charity fund to share out every year

Purpose built industrial units may not be suitable for conversion, and given that we aren’t going to see a return of the traditional high street in many places, presumably there is also the option to knock them down and rebuild suitable housing, I believe that’s what Labour are saying.
My nearest town is a traditional market town, and from what you’ve said previously GSM I think yours probably is too. The buildings here are Georgian and Victorian, mainly three storey, with shops on the ground floor. There is capacity to convert more of them from commercial to shared or purely residential use.

I am not disagreeing with you growstuff

I think our High Street benefited from people working from home, and has continued to do so.

I agree with you GSM. The country needs more genuinely affordable rental properties and private landlords aren't going to provide them.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GG13 I was talking about shops in a high street. A number of the units have already been converted over the years to residential units. I don't suppose my town has the only high street like that.

In any case, having foreign landlords siphons off wealth from the UK, whether they own residential or commercial units.

The local authorities need to decide if they want to attract more businesses to the high street or convert to residential.

How can a council attract more businesses when the rents on premises are sky high and the demand isn't there?

Business rate discounts for a start.

High streets are evolving, coffee shops, restaurants, hairdressers, nail bars, beauty/aesthetics salons.

Some High streets (including the one I live on) have the odd small block of apartments intermingled with shops, but as they are all within walking distance to the station the prices are £350,000 and above.

I think you know I live in the best place to live in the Eastern region (according to the Sunday Times anyway). A number of commercial properties on the high street have been converted into residential dwellings. Even so, there are still some empty shops which never seem to be occupied for very long. The demand isn't there for the kind of shops which existed 50 years ago and I can't see how any council is going to change people's shopping habits.

Some time ago the Conservative government made it easier for commercial premises to be converted to residential. But not all are suitable for conversion. One or two small empty shops wouldn’t be a great prospect for any developer.

As I have said before, what is needed is more affordable rental housing, not more shared ownership. This means more investment in local authorities and housing associations providing such accommodation, not developers. Developers can however provide the key through community infrastructure levy or s106 payments. They can also undertake design and build projects for local authorities. I didn’t hear much of this from the Labour conference, simply providing’’more houses’. That is too simplistic. Houses aren’t selling at present. The devil is always in the detail,

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GG13 I was talking about shops in a high street. A number of the units have already been converted over the years to residential units. I don't suppose my town has the only high street like that.

In any case, having foreign landlords siphons off wealth from the UK, whether they own residential or commercial units.

The local authorities need to decide if they want to attract more businesses to the high street or convert to residential.

How can a council attract more businesses when the rents on premises are sky high and the demand isn't there?

Business rate discounts for a start.

High streets are evolving, coffee shops, restaurants, hairdressers, nail bars, beauty/aesthetics salons.

Some High streets (including the one I live on) have the odd small block of apartments intermingled with shops, but as they are all within walking distance to the station the prices are £350,000 and above.

The rents are negotiable because landlords want their property occupied, for a lot of businesses the issue here has been the business rates. Locally they have had a lot of success encouraging businesses on the high street by offering much lower rates. I appreciate that as this is a tourist area the demand for coffee shops and mountaineering shops is higher than average, and we have more independent businesses than more urban areas though.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GG13 I was talking about shops in a high street. A number of the units have already been converted over the years to residential units. I don't suppose my town has the only high street like that.

In any case, having foreign landlords siphons off wealth from the UK, whether they own residential or commercial units.

The local authorities need to decide if they want to attract more businesses to the high street or convert to residential.

How can a council attract more businesses when the rents on premises are sky high and the demand isn't there?

That bl***y word "adfordable" again. None of the affordable houses on the new estate by me are less than £300,000 hardly anyone can afford them. They are mostly tiny 1 or 2 bedroom houses.

I suppose they could have a line of sinister looking blackshirts in front of the stage. Not good optics though.

I think Galaxy is right. I don’t think it’s been identified yet who the protester was, but it’s more than likely to have been a delegate, who would have been there legitimately. The only way to prevent these incidents, which happen all too frequently in party conferences regardless of party is to tighten up the security further.

I was surprised at the ‘lax’ security that enabled a protester to get onto the stage with KS today. As others have said, the protester could have had much more sinister aims than throwing glitter. That said, I thought KS dealt with the situation superbly. After the initial shock (and he did look shocked) he simply took off the now glittery jacket, rolled up his sleeves and got on with the job in hand. Well done to the next Prime Minister of the UK👏👏👏

I will say unfortunatrly I think it's almost impossible to completely prevent that sort of thing without very authoritarian restrictions on who can attend.

GrannyGravy13

Oreo

But where’s the security Galaxy ? It could have been acid that was thrown.

Definitely should have had much tighter security, but with heightened tensions at the moment I am surprised that they got so close to Sir Starmer.

It happened to poor Theresa May as well - remember?

I’m not convinced that we can expect to regenerate the type of town centres we once had. On-line shopping has killed it.

Oreo

But where’s the security Galaxy ? It could have been acid that was thrown.

Definitely should have had much tighter security, but with heightened tensions at the moment I am surprised that they got so close to Sir Starmer.