Who is going to have any money left to be able to afford a home of their own?

Dorset should tell Blears to clear off, mind her own business,and stop messing around with the green belt- I would say to people , turn your land over for agriculture/allotmen
ts/chicken farms/anything that feeds the nation efficiently and more besides!

If nobody's going to buy them, then nobody's going to build them - as recent events demonstrate. More meaningless targets from the government.

This arrogant bunch ruining, oops sorry! 'running' the country won't give a fig about concreting over the landscape. Once it's gone it's lost forever. Kick 'em out!

Whilst there is a short term blip because mortgages are not available which has stalled building more dwellings the demand for housing continues to rise and all that will happen is that when the financial marked turns round this pent up demand will force prices up
This has all been seen before in the 80's and 90's
As I have said many times in the past if you want family houses with gardens in this conerbation the only land available is what is currently green belt
You have to be realistic and accept that people want to live in the South and not in the Midlands or the North
the only way to hold down prices and house people is to revert to building more social housing either through Council Housing or Housing Associations with affordable rents but these should be allocated , in my opinion , to local people first.
The population is increasing with people living longer and therefore more housing is neccessary

You have to be realistic and accept that people want to live in the South and not in the Midlands or the North

If you don't build the houses then people won't be able to move here. Simple as that. You can't go on expanding ad infinitum or there will be no countryside or villages left..

These unelected regional assemblies must be disestablished asap.

I totally agree with Adrian Fudge, as we all complain about back garden developments, a gentle sprawl into the green stuff is the only answer.
The only sticking point for me is that this increase in accommodation is not backed-up / supported by infrastructure.
The road system in Dorset is diabolical and is suffering from decades of no great investment.
No new homes should be built until provision is made!

Over-development by building as close as one can, often eventually leads to a breakdown in community welfare with conflicts leading to serious breakdowns in Law and Order. Parking and noise being the most common.

As I have said before:

Such problems would not arise if Britain were to follow the example of the Hong Kong and China Government.

There they have built an Internationally famous Airport off of Hong Kong's coast line on rubbish waste from main land China.

We have a waste disposal problem so we are all told, so why not combine the two and Turn Junk into Billion Pound land Space?


Instead of wasting good arable farming land for landfill sites and gravel extraction Use the waste to shore up our sea defences which are eroding fast.

Don't waste rubbish use it for good intent.

Also excessive building and Gravel Extraction from good arable farming land is often irreversible destruction. Thus making the UK become more and more reliant on foreign imported foods which is an extremely bad policy. Labours continuous disregard for our countryside is very concerning.

I totally agree with Adrian Fudge, as we all complain about back garden developments, a gentle sprawl into the green stuff is the only answer.

No it isn't. There are hundreds of thousands of properties lying empty in the UK. We should use them before building more houses, particularly on green belt land.

And Adrian Fudge is wrong about having to build more houses here just because people "only want to live in the South"! So what's wrong with the North and Midlands, Mr Fudge? And if it's lack of highly paid jobs, perhaps it'd be better to try and revitalise their local economies than trying to cram everyone into the South and Southeast of the country?

The only reason the green belt needs destroying is to house all the degenerate immigrant welfare bludging nobodies that the UK is quite happy to house just to satisfy the PC brigade.

Posted by: Phil, Poole on 9:34am today

Quote No it isn't. There are hundreds of thousands of properties lying empty in the UK. We should use them.

Reply Very good point you have made here Phil .

Only a short time ago we read in the Echo as to a great number of flats in Bournemouth and Poole remaining empty, did we not?

So far none of you have come up with an idea to save Dorset , have you?-- and you are all mostly in Tory held seats- shame on you all-
How about an action committee and big signs, and a fighting fund? Petitions- Downing street on line petition? Cmon get your act together and do it!!

http://petitions.pm.
gov.uk/
Create your own -Okay

More concrete more flooding, brainless.Stop and think.

http://petitions.
pm.gov.uk/
DorsetGreenBelt/

Posted by: Tru Belle, purbeck on 9:58am today

Quote So far none of you have come up with an idea to save Dorset , have you?-- and you are all mostly in Tory held seats- shame on you all-

Reply Not so Tru Belle.

If you had read and digested the content of my first post in this thread, you would see that you have no justification to have said what you have.

I do admire your fighting spirit it's very rare , from what I have seen you Girls have more courage and than the Lads and you also stick together and support one another.

I see you state you are from Purbeck, so at the bottom of this thread do go to the link thread titled 'Tax cash should boost bus routes'

Here's the an extract do read below:

Here you will see my posting as to'

New Labours regime is technically illegal under English Law.

As I have said before:

Such problems would not arise if Britain were to follow the example of the Hong Kong and China Government.

There they have built an Internationally famous Airport off of Hong Kong's coast line on rubbish waste from main land China.

We have a waste disposal problem so we are all told, so why not combine the two and Turn Junk into Billion Pound land Space?

Link to:

labours regime is technically illegal under English Law.

http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/news/pu
rbeck/display.var.23
53279.0.tax_cash_sho
uld_boost_bus_routes
.php

Perhaps if the expectations of young people were lower, flats (with covered parking) could be made greater use of. Not many of todays youth (or oldth) seem very interested in gardening anyway.

We have travelled back to the 1950's & 60's when the majority of the working population had no chance of buying their own home. Unless a Government is brave enough to allow local authorities to return to building social housing, the situation will only get worse.

At least the myth of Labour's management of the economy has now been blown. People have blindly ridden on the wave of booming prices and easy credit, now the pain is going to be felt and hard.

Is the pain of economic mismanagement, easy credit and the buy now pay later ethos really going to come back and bite anyone?

The government can not afford for Generation X to pay for their own excess. Expect legislation, the cutting of interest rates and financial handouts aplenty as the governement attempts to prop up a flagging economy supported by people who spend more than they earn. The bubble wil get bigger before it bursts.

THE POPULATION IS AGEING BUT NOT GROWING.
IF IT IS SPREADING OUT (E.G. LIVING ALONE) IT WILL CHANGE BACK AFTER THE "BABY BOOMERS" TIME HAS PASSED.
ANY RASH MOVE NOW WILL COME BACK TO HAUNT THE POPULATION IN THE FUTURE.
HANG ON TO THE "GREEN STUFF".
FUTURE GENERATIONS DESERVE WHAT YOU HAVE!

So let me get this right. More homes, means more people. More people means more jobs needed to sustain an economy. So how does the government propose to balance an economy with little localised large industry, add to that increased congestion, as one county with NO motorway. So lets add more houses, more people, more concrete, fewer jobs to go round, a plan in line with most of the insane nonsense this government has promoted during it's tenure. Let's hope the local councils win this fight, and show sanity in this.

The councils do not stand a hope in hells chance against government decisions.There is an unelected regional government now-- but all is not lost because we can all raise hell on this by really making a huge fuss just like the north east did with their un elected assembly.

Phil wrote:

I totally agree with Adrian Fudge, as we all complain about back garden developments, a gentle sprawl into the green stuff is the only answer.

No it isn't. There are hundreds of thousands of properties lying empty in the UK. We should use them before building more houses, particularly on green belt land. And Adrian Fudge is wrong about having to build more houses here just because people "only want to live in the South"! So what's wrong with the North and Midlands, Mr Fudge? And if it's lack of highly paid jobs, perhaps it'd be better to try and revitalise their local economies than trying to cram everyone into the South and Southeast of the country?

Contrary to your posting I did not say that people "ONLY" wanted to live in the South please do not put a diffrent emphasis on what is said
Nothings wrong with the Midlands or the North .
i visit my daughter who lives in Derbyshire frequently and its a beautiful area but I , and presumably you, prefer to live in the South and so do a lot of other people
The demand for housing is , as I said already there and increasing and it will be extreamly difficult if not impossable for the youngsters of this area to find affordable accomodation when they grow up
Who is going to tell them hard luck move North

What youngsters Mr Fudge? We cannot get enough youngsters to fill school places- we have an excess of 1,000 school places to fill in the Purbeck area- I cannot see the demand or strong evidence of many pregnant mothers. Couples are struggling on two salaries just trying to make ends meet. People are also so very worried about job security too, we all need hard evidence on housing demand- the figures do not stack up.

As previously stated,I wish the Government would contact the Crown Estates/Duchy of Cornwall and Church Landholdings to see if they would like to help the country out for a change.Freehold of course.

...And as I have said before. The answer is not to build even more houses. The answer is that those people living in houses too large for them (the retired and DINKies) should be forced to sell and down size into a flat or 1 up - 1 down house so that families can have larger houses without having to build on still more green belt land!

There are 10's of thousands of people (in the whole of the country) living in houses far too big for their needs; children grown up & left home, never had kids or just plain selfish so why should they keep the big houses when we are forcing families into the tiny 'homes' that builders are putting up nowadays?

The labour government should introduce a law which makes having empty bedrooms illegal (perhaps they could use Purbeck Council's idea of a 'bedroom tax' to force old people to sell their homes when they retire!).

At the traffic lights the other day an old bu***r in the car next to me asked why I was driving a gas guzzler (is a Ford Street Ka with the roof down a gas guzzler??)so I asked him how many rooms in his house were unoccupied, and how much carbon he was emitting just to provide heat & light to those rooms!!.

Get the old out so that we can house families.

BADGER,
THE "OLD" E.G. YOUR MUM AND DAD, RAISED YOU (OBVIOUSLY NOT TOO WELL) AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE WALKING AROUND TODAY WITH THEIR HANDS OUT AND WERE SUPPOSED TO TEACH THEM TO STAND ON THEIR OWN TWO FEET.
OBVIOUSLY THEY FAILED!
YOU WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO THROW THESE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIER HOMES!
INSTEAD OF WASTING MORE MONEY ON FLATS FOR YOUR MUM AND DAD WHY NOT JUST SEND THEM TO SOME GAS CHAMBERS?
I BET YOUR PARENTS ARE PROUD OF YOU!

I think you will find a lot of property developers keen to tarmac Dorset are Tory, its big business, BMW driving, the state paying for your nanny ... TORIES! IMHO.

laurie marsh wrote:
BADGER, THE "OLD" E.G. YOUR MUM AND DAD, RAISED YOU (OBVIOUSLY NOT TOO WELL) AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE WALKING AROUND TODAY WITH THEIR HANDS OUT AND WERE SUPPOSED TO TEACH THEM TO STAND ON THEIR OWN TWO FEET. OBVIOUSLY THEY FAILED! YOU WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO THROW THESE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIER HOMES! INSTEAD OF WASTING MORE MONEY ON FLATS FOR YOUR MUM AND DAD WHY NOT JUST SEND THEM TO SOME GAS CHAMBERS? I BET YOUR PARENTS ARE PROUD OF YOU!

laurie marsh...Do you have to shout, or are you going deaf in your old age? Perhaps your difficulty in hearing is caused by the echo in the empty rooms in your house???

...And I didn’t say anything about 'disposing' of the old people, I simply suggested that they should be relocated to ease the overcrowding in this country, not that it should bother you with all the spare land you have down there (no doubt stolen from the aboriginal peoples using 'white mans law' as an excuse)

If you consider my suggestion to reduce the burden of building homes on our dwindling green belt to mean euthanize the old then you really do have some hang ups about 'the war'. Might I suggest that you get some help before it's too late?

The government is showing contempt for conservation and the environment by forcing this house building on our area

We need to protect not only the Green Belt but all the green areas in our town

That's what gives Bournemouth its character

None of what you see is 'natural', go on Google Maps etc zoom out and you will see a green and yellow quilt of agro-cultural destruction of our natural fauna habitats. Our countryside is man made, pretty, but not natural. I blame the Anglo Saxons.

laurie marsh wrote:
BADGER, THE "OLD" E.G. YOUR MUM AND DAD, RAISED YOU (OBVIOUSLY NOT TOO WELL) AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE WALKING AROUND TODAY WITH THEIR HANDS OUT AND WERE SUPPOSED TO TEACH THEM TO STAND ON THEIR OWN TWO FEET. OBVIOUSLY THEY FAILED! YOU WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO THROW THESE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIER HOMES! INSTEAD OF WASTING MORE MONEY ON FLATS FOR YOUR MUM AND DAD WHY NOT JUST SEND THEM TO SOME GAS CHAMBERS? I BET YOUR PARENTS ARE PROUD OF YOU!

Well said laurie marshbut it might be a different story in a few years time when Badgers time comes & no i dont think his parents will be very proud of him because if thats how he thinks then clearly they have failed as parents, but it does go to show what sick individuals their are out their God help us.

'New Labours regime is technically illegal under English Law'. HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA
,HA,HA,Ha! Robert Mugabe is illegal, not the standing Labour party leader. You vote for a 'party' not its leader! Remember 18 Years of Tories and weep if they get back in ... vote Lib to stop it.

Can anybody come up with any suggestions as to where all these houses should be built, we need the houses so where do we build them ???.

The problem is who can't force people out of their houses or to live in the north, and if you restrict house building the result will be higher prices.
At present were heading for the worst of all worlds, filling in the green belt turning family houses into flats and allowing piece meal developement across Dorset. I think sadly the only answer is larger developements on green land outside Bournemouth and Poole (for instance to the East of Burton) and at least keep some of the open spaces around the existing conurbations.

At the traffic lights the other day an old bu***r in the car next to me asked why I was driving a gas guzzler (is a Ford Street Ka with the roof down a gas guzzler??)so I asked him how many rooms in his house were unoccupied, and how much carbon he was emitting just to provide heat & light to those rooms!!.

Amateur gas guzzler. I drive a 2.7t 4x4 and have a three bedroom house. Thing is, I don't turn the lights on in rooms I'm not in and the radiators/heating are only switched on as required. I've no desire to heat a room when it's not in use.

As it happens I pay for my house, so feel free to come over and try and evict me and see which end of the shotgun comes your way.

Badger, Poole on 1:51pm today

To each according to his need, from each according to their ability. That is a Karl Marx fundamental principle is it not?

Great for grossly fat ignorant stupid foul mouthed violent and lazy single parents.

Not so good for the clever hard working honest law abiding career person.

Stalin jammed the old into tiny flats. Come to think of it, he jammed everyone into tiny flats.

BADGER,
IF I AM TYPING TOO LOUD FOR YOU WELL TOO BAD.
MY HOUSE (BOUGHT AND PAID FOR) USED TO ECHO WITH THE LAUGHTER OF MY CHILDREN. IT NOW IS FULL OF THEIR CHILDRENS NOISE AND I LOVE EVERY SHRIEK!
I WOULD HATE TO SEE PEOPLE OF YOUR ILK "RELOCATING" THE VERY PEOPLE THAT PAID THEIR TAXES TO PAY FOR YOUR EDUCATION (SUCH AS IT IS), MEDICAL CARE AND DOLE CHECK.
ONE POINT THAT YOU DID NOT REPLY ON IS WHETHER YOU THINK THAT IT IS OK FOR YOUR PARENTS TO BE "RELOCATED"?
IF YOU DONT WANT TO REPLY I UNDERSTAND!

Again, this whole idea of building houses in the South just because 'more people want to move here' is ludicrous. If we leave things be, house price differentials will encourage more people to live elsewhere – and more firms to relocate to cheaper areas. This would spread prosperity and be better for the country as a whole.

I mean, what if every single person in the UK wanted to live in Bournemouth? Would we build thousands of high-rise tower blocks to accommodate them all? Of course we wouldn't!

vote-them-out wrote:

At the traffic lights the other day an old bu***r in the car next to me asked why I was driving a gas guzzler (is a Ford Street Ka with the roof down a gas guzzler??)so I asked him how many rooms in his house were unoccupied, and how much carbon he was emitting just to provide heat & light to those rooms!!.

Amateur gas guzzler. I drive a 2.7t 4x4 and have a three bedroom house. Thing is, I don't turn the lights on in rooms I'm not in and the radiators/heating are only switched on as required. I've no desire to heat a room when it's not in use. As it happens I pay for my house, so feel free to come over and try and evict me and see which end of the shotgun comes your way.

Silly boy (or girl). This is not a p*****g contest about who's got the biggest this, or who can pay for that...This is about the concreting over of what's left of our open spaces just to make room for rabbit hutch houses put up by greedy developers for a (Scottish) government hell bent on destroying our (English) way of life. It doesn’t take the brains of an archbishop to realise that it doesn’t matter if you've got one or a dozen shotguns the fact is that eventually there will be so many houses here that we wont be able to move for the traffic jams! And as we all know just too well, this government wont invest in roads and other infrastructure because if there’s no congestion there can be no congestion charging!

Oh, and HAL101 . Our socialist leaders will eventually wake up to realise that Stalin's idea of squeezing everyone into flats was a good idea. Personally I'd prefer to see a few concrete tower blocks and lots of open land between them rather than one vast concrete sprawl with not a green leaf to be seen for miles!

Eh?
Seems as if that is happening right now- everywhere you look in B'mouth. Poole Weymouth, Swanage, Wimborne,yep -they all want to live down here - mostly to retire, so Houston- we really do have a problem- The lonliness of flatland beckons!

"The answer is that those people living in houses too large for them (the retired and DINKies) should be forced to sell and down size into a flat or 1 up "
Hell would freeze over before I downsize to accommodate a family. Do you really think I worked b**** hard for 30+ years to move to a shoe-box? The only box I'm moving to is a coffin!
It's not the elderly being in 2+ bedroom properties that's the issue - nowadays most marriages/partnershi
ps break up - the man invariably gets shunted out to live in the shoebox while the woman keeps the house. Bring in thousands of aliens and it's no wonder we have a housing shortage.

For once it would seem that most, if not all, of our local representatives are singing from the same hymn sheet. Upton and Lytchett Minster are going to be hard-hit if this ridiculous RSS target is rubber stamped by Hazel Blears. An unelected quango imposing ITS will on the residents of a semi-rural area is tantamount to dictatorship. We in the Purbecks will fight tooth and nail to oppose this scheme and I would urge anyone who doesn't want to see the destruction of the green belt to get involved in their local Action Group. Oh and just to inflame the "politico's" amongst you, the Regional Assembly is supported by Labour AND the Lib Dems!!!!

Badger wrote:

vote-them-out wrote:

At the traffic lights the other day an old bu***r in the car next to me asked why I was driving a gas guzzler (is a Ford Street Ka with the roof down a gas guzzler??)so I asked him how many rooms in his house were unoccupied, and how much carbon he was emitting just to provide heat & light to those rooms!!.

Amateur gas guzzler. I drive a 2.7t 4x4 and have a three bedroom house. Thing is, I don't turn the lights on in rooms I'm not in and the radiators/heating are only switched on as required. I've no desire to heat a room when it's not in use. As it happens I pay for my house, so feel free to come over and try and evict me and see which end of the shotgun comes your way.

Silly boy (or girl). This is not a p*****g contest about who's got the biggest this, or who can pay for that...This is about the concreting over of what's left of our open spaces just to make room for rabbit hutch houses put up by greedy developers for a (Scottish) government hell bent on destroying our (English) way of life. It doesn’t take the brains of an archbishop to realise that it doesn’t matter if you've got one or a dozen shotguns the fact is that eventually there will be so many houses here that we wont be able to move for the traffic jams! And as we all know just too well, this government wont invest in roads and other infrastructure because if there’s no congestion there can be no congestion charging! Oh, and HAL101 . Our socialist leaders will eventually wake up to realise that Stalin's idea of squeezing everyone into flats was a good idea. Personally I'd prefer to see a few concrete tower blocks and lots of open land between them rather than one vast concrete sprawl with not a green leaf to be seen for miles!

Getting a little over-excited here I think. Time for a cup of tea is it not?

http://www.gosw.gov.
uk/gosw/peoplesc/146
509/

This is our government for the south west!! See what they want to do for you all- Did any one ask them to come in?

Posted by: Badger, Poole on 1:51pm today

Quote The labour government should introduce a law which makes having empty bedrooms illegal (perhaps they could use Purbeck Council's idea of a 'bedroom tax' to force old people to sell their homes when they retire!).

Reply What a hideous ill mannered uneducated comment.

Get back to your little BOX and stay there.

It appears from other readers comments you are indeed Badger by Name, and Badger by Nature are you not?

Badgers spend most of thier life in the DARK under ground your name suites your charter type.

stop whinging those of you who own a house and think of the poor people who have to live in a box due to the current planning laws and pay a fortune for it

Councillors hope Mr Cameron will pledge to scrap the controversial targets and give local councils the power to set their own figures if the Conservatives win the next general election.

His first job should be the dismantling of all "Regional Authorities" and any other superfluous layers of government. All these do is increase the members' power in areas beyond their purview while decreasing accountability for their actions.

A spokesperson for the Department of Communities and Local Government said:

I couldn't have made up an example better than a national government department for decisions which, by definition, should be purely local.

Tru Belle wrote:
What youngsters Mr Fudge? We cannot get enough youngsters to fill school places- we have an excess of 1,000 school places to fill in the Purbeck area- I cannot see the demand or strong evidence of many pregnant mothers. Couples are struggling on two salaries just trying to make ends meet. People are also so very worried about job security too, we all need hard evidence on housing demand- the figures do not stack up.

Sorry I dont understand
The schools are full of youngsters
They will all become adults
People are living longer
The population is increasing
The demand for housing is and will continue to increase
The above is reality
I dont know how anybody can dispute this since all statistics(and dont say you can prove anything with statistics this is pure numerics)prove it

Well how urban are you. Get your head out of the sand and cut the mantra out please. My area is under Red Knight rule- quite sick to death of trotted out mantra. Life extends further than Boscombe East!!

Please, does anyone know how the SW Regional Assembly is constituted, who serves on it and how they were 'elected'? (using the word 'elected' advisedly). Also, how often does this Assembly meet and to whom is it responsible? There are so many questions about this quango

mike wrote:
Please, does anyone know how the SW Regional Assembly is constituted, who serves on it and how they were 'elected'? (using the word 'elected' advisedly). Also, how often does this Assembly meet and to whom is it responsible? There are so many questions about this quango

http://www.southwest
-ra.gov.uk/nqcontent
.cfm?a_id=877&tt=swr
a

I don't think this made it as a link, but I'm sure it'll cut and paste. From looking at the make up I'd say we can blame Labour for its existence, but not for the decisions it makes... there's not a lot of Labour councillors aboard.

http://www.gosw.gov.

uk/gosw/peoplesc/146

509/

This is our government for the south west!! See what they want to do for you all- Did any one ask them to come in?
When you have all looked at that, then try the South West Regional Development Agency- they are another quango-- who will define all these new planning hardhits that are due to land in the laps of everyone shortly!
Oh quite forgot about the South West Regional Assembly too,so many aren't there- full of advisors and consultants who are poised to stick their noses in to say what is good for you all!!

Does anyone know of NAMES of representatives on the SW Regional Development Agency who make decisions on 'our behalf?' It almost seems to be a secret society..of dubious nature

Quote from Borough of Poole website:
"There are currently about 1,500 empty homes in Poole and nearly 350 are long term empty."

mike wrote:
undefined

if you're looking for names of assembly members you can go on to the site I mentioned before. There is a link to a list in the middle of the page if memory serves me. There are some familiar names indeed - some who post here from time to time.

I live in the proposed area where 2750 homes are going to be built. I am absolutely sure that Hazel Blears has not seen the beauty of this area and what will be completely wiped out if (I pray it is never a when ) these houses are going to be built. Lytchett Minster and Lytchett Matravers are lovely places that will be changed out of all recognition. Tourism is one of the biggest industries in this area. What will happen when all the heathland, fields and countryside is gone. It will be bigger than Canford Heath over here. I am not being a NIMBY (not in my back yard), I agree we could do with some low cost housing so our children can stay in this area, but nearly 3000 homes cannot be sustained with the proposals of the RSS. Try coming back from Wareham or Studland on a sunny afternoon and you will know what I mean. Where are all the secondary age children going to go to school? What is going to happen when the roads flood after a downpour when there are no fields to drain the water away? It will be like Gloucester and Hull all over again!

I am absolutely sure that Hazel Blears has not seen the beauty of this area and what will be completely wiped out if (I pray it is never a when ) these houses are going to be built.
Why should Hazel Blears care? She doesn't live here, and politicians of all types are only concerned with what will affect them.

Hazel Blears and co are more concerned with number crunching-massaging statistics and inflicting as much grief as possible. It is a phenomena that some of us have met-whether through awkward neighbours and petty arguments over hedges , boundaries, cars children, tall trees , noise, smells, etc- It has a name- POWER-and this will be used to the real extreme!

Tim M, Thanks for the info. re members of the SW Regional Assembly. It makes VERY interesting reading. It may be worth asking a few pointed questions of those local councillors who 'serve' on the quango

quo...And as I have said before. The answer is not to build even more houses. The answer is that those people living in houses too large for them (the retired and DINKies) should be forced to sell and down size into a flat or 1 up - 1 down house so that families can have larger houses without having to build on still more green belt land!
What rubbish even if it was to happen and why should it making people sell their larger house which they have worked had to buy nobody can afford them. It is all right building all these new houses but people still cannot afford to buy them.

Tru Belle wrote:
Hazel Blears and co are more concerned with number crunching-massaging statistics and inflicting as much grief as possible. It is a phenomena that some of us have met-whether through awkward neighbours and petty arguments over hedges , boundaries, cars children, tall trees , noise, smells, etc- It has a name- POWER-and this will be used to the real extreme!

Too right. All this Government cares about is headline statistics and targets, rather than a long-term approach to change things for the better. This simplistic sledgehammer approach has already ruined the education system, the NHS and policing.

As for Hazel Blears, can anyone really take her seriously now? Her days in the cabinet must surely be numbered after that embarrassing stolen laptop incident.

perhaps if there weren't so many people who have second homes in this region there would be enough first homes for people. As for people who want to buy second homes here - shame on you - you won't be contributing full time to the economy here and it will cost us locals our beautiful countryside!

Tim M wrote:

mike wrote: undefined

if you're looking for names of assembly members you can go on to the site I mentioned before. There is a link to a list in the middle of the page if memory serves me. There are some familiar names indeed - some who post here from time to time.

The make up of the assemblyis
Councillors
38 conservatives
25 lib dems
9 labour
5 independant
2 unknown

35 non Councillors

It doesnt look like you can blame Labour for its decisions!!
It would be interesting to know how the others have voted --assuming they attend

Phil wrote:

Tru Belle wrote: Hazel Blears and co are more concerned with number crunching-massaging statistics and inflicting as much grief as possible. It is a phenomena that some of us have met-whether through awkward neighbours and petty arguments over hedges , boundaries, cars children, tall trees , noise, smells, etc- It has a name- POWER-and this will be used to the real extreme!

Too right. All this Government cares about is headline statistics and targets, rather than a long-term approach to change things for the better. This simplistic sledgehammer approach has already ruined the education system, the NHS and policing. As for Hazel Blears, can anyone really take her seriously now? Her days in the cabinet must surely be numbered after that embarrassing stolen laptop incident.

Both spot on. New Labour aren't interested in quality of life our our beautiful countryside in the South - as it's not Labbour country they simply do not care. Note in places such as Liverpool they are knocking down old houses and replacing them with fewer houses and more green spaces. Whereas down here they just want to pile us all up on top of each other.

adrian fudge wrote:

Tim M wrote:

mike wrote: undefined

if you're looking for names of assembly members you can go on to the site I mentioned before. There is a link to a list in the middle of the page if memory serves me. There are some familiar names indeed - some who post here from time to time.

The make up of the assemblyis Councillors 38 conservatives 25 lib dems 9 labour 5 independant 2 unknown 35 non Councillors It doesnt look like you can blame Labour for its decisions!! It would be interesting to know how the others have voted --assuming they attend

You probably can blame Labour, since they signed on to the whole bureaucrat behemoth apparently without questioning it, but beyond that, they seem to be outnumbered 70 - 9, so shame on the non-Labour members for caving in to remote big government shenanigans. Unfortunately it is here to stay, because, as it's website states:
"The South West Regional Assembly exists to promote the economic, social and environmental well-being of all who live and work in the region. It reviews and develops wide ranging strategies at the regional level to provide an over-arching vision for the South West. It works to provide a voice for the region and aims to develop the capacity for further action at the regional level." The touchy-feely first sentence guarantees its further existence because the language used allows anyone questioning policies to be instantly demonised as uncaring about those things. The final words remove all "local" involvement and distribute decision making among a number of people who more often than not do not represent constituents who will have to pay for and live with the consequences. Creepy stuff.

Tim M wrote:

adrian fudge wrote:

Tim M wrote:

mike wrote: undefined

if you're looking for names of assembly members you can go on to the site I mentioned before. There is a link to a list in the middle of the page if memory serves me. There are some familiar names indeed - some who post here from time to time.

The make up of the assemblyis Councillors 38 conservatives 25 lib dems 9 labour 5 independant 2 unknown 35 non Councillors It doesnt look like you can blame Labour for its decisions!! It would be interesting to know how the others have voted --assuming they attend

You probably can blame Labour, since they signed on to the whole bureaucrat behemoth apparently without questioning it, but beyond that, they seem to be outnumbered 70 - 9, so shame on the non-Labour members for caving in to remote big government shenanigans. Unfortunately it is here to stay, because, as it's website states: "The South West Regional Assembly exists to promote the economic, social and environmental well-being of all who live and work in the region. It reviews and develops wide ranging strategies at the regional level to provide an over-arching vision for the South West. It works to provide a voice for the region and aims to develop the capacity for further action at the regional level." The touchy-feely first sentence guarantees its further existence because the language used allows anyone questioning policies to be instantly demonised as uncaring about those things. The final words remove all "local" involvement and distribute decision making among a number of people who more often than not do not represent constituents who will have to pay for and live with the consequences. Creepy stuff.

Creepy stuff indeed. This nasty, sinister government have slowly taken away our traditional democratic powers,it's scary how compliant people have been , only now waking up to what they really are about.

dragonm8 wrote:
The only reason the green belt needs destroying is to house all the degenerate immigrant welfare bludging nobodies that the UK is quite happy to house just to satisfy the PC brigade.

Well said dragonm8....I am also sick to the back teeth of the murdering, benefit immigrant scroungers, many of who also reside in the UK.

Abu Qatada, age 48 - long branded Osama bin Laden's No2 in Europe - had been held in jail under anti-terror laws, however, he walked free recently, thanks to the Appeal Court. It backed a claim by the Jordanian born extremist that deporting him to his home-land , where he was convicted in his absence 0f terror offences, breached his Human Rights.

Qatada has been warned that he will go back to jail if he contacts al-Qaeda boss bin Laden.
Another bail condition is that he stays away from fellow hate preacher Abu Hamza (Hamza the Hook, the guy with a hook hand) Hamza is in jail for inciting murder.

There are many others, too many to name. These low-lifes are given large homes to live in, because they often have large families, benefits, round the clock protection, all at the tax-payers expense. They incite hatred against British Citizens, yet because of certain laws, they have the right to appeal against deportation, which again costs the tax-payer millions. They are supported in full by the tax-payer, in some cases, indefinitely.

When are we finally going to wake up and realise that mainland UK is only just a small Island, and we are fast running out of land to house even the hardworking, law abiding citizens, without allowing all these Benefit Scrounging undesirables to remain in the country. We should now reject all requests by foreign immigrants, to come and reside in the UK, with the exception of those that can prove their life would be endangered should they be deported. Also those that can self support without demanding benefits as their right, even though they have never paid into the system.

Badger wrote:
...And as I have said before. The answer is not to build even more houses. The answer is that those people living in houses too large for them (the retired and DINKies) should be forced to sell and down size into a flat or 1 up - 1 down house so that families can have larger houses without having to build on still more green belt land!

There are 10's of thousands of people (in the whole of the country) living in houses far too big for their needs; children grown up & left home, never had kids or just plain selfish so why should they keep the big houses when we are forcing families into the tiny 'homes' that builders are putting up nowadays?

The labour government should introduce a law which makes having empty bedrooms illegal (perhaps they could use Purbeck Council's idea of a 'bedroom tax' to force old people to sell their homes when they retire!).

At the traffic lights the other day an old bu***r in the car next to me asked why I was driving a gas guzzler (is a Ford Street Ka with the roof down a gas guzzler??)so I asked him how many rooms in his house were unoccupied, and how much carbon he was emitting just to provide heat & light to those rooms!!.

Get the old out so that we can house families.

I can understand the way you are thinking and in an ideal world, it would make sense. However, this is not an ideal world....It never will be either. To be quite frank with you, I work with elderly people and have to say that, yes, it is a waste of valuable space, elderly or retired folk, rattling around in a large home with perhaps only one bedroom used, or in some cases, none at all, as due to mobility issues they now live in the downstairs rooms only. However, many of these folk have lived in these homes all their married life, and in some cases longer, as they may have inherited the property from their parents. They own the properties outright, so how on earth do you propose to forcibly evict these people, who have every right to stay put for the remainder of their days, should they so desire. Or until it is impossible for them to safely continue to care for themselves in this large family residence. I certainly intend to remain in my home, even when I have spare rooms. I have worked hard to afford the detached property I reside in with my family. It is my home....It's as simple as that. (By the way, I have a spare room, but it is well used as an Office/Temporary bedroom, etc etc....

The reason families are being forced into the tiny 'homes' that builders are putting up nowadays?, (Your words), is simply down to economics. Land is at a premium, and builders are becoming more and more greedy and selfish, wanting more for their money. Gone are the days, where properties were built to a decent size and standard, with ample gardens. My property is fairly large, with extensive gardens, back and front, but it was built in 1935.

We have better health care, therefore people do live longer and are actively encouraged to live independently, and remain in their own homes.

Look at this way. It is better that they remain in their chosen home, as opposed to "Bed blocking" in Hospitals. I can assure you that this is on the increase again, as sheltered accommodation and good quality Care homes are becoming more expensive difficult to come by.

I don't believe the problem lies with elderly folk. I believe it lies with the break down of marriages, meaning more homes required to accommodate these divided families. I also believe there are two many single parent, young mums, many of them just kids themselves, putting demands on housing. Some will have a baby just to use it as a powerful tool to gain housing. There are of course all the immigrants, but thats another debate, don't even get me started on that!!!

Show some respect for out Senior Citizens, as you will be one yourself one day. People's freedom of choice, and dignity should always be respected. These old folk were after all, born, long before you and I.