tonyh29 Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 2 hours ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said: He can campaign for the Tories under the cover of a Newspaper. If there are by-elections or whatever then this can't be, can it ? that's a fair point .. didn't the Tories get one series of the Apprentice delayed as Sugar is a Labour advisor and could have given Labour unfair exposure (or something) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Andrew Neill reckons this is Osborne's way of getting back at Theresa May if Brexit goes t*ts up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itdoesntmatterwhatthissay Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 20 hours ago, Davkaus said: The Guardian has an unnamed minister suggesting it's a platform for Osbourne to launch his campaign to be Mayor of London in 2020. It's worth noting that due to boundary changes, his seat won't even exist at the next GE so his constituents won't even get a chance to kick him out. How very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) I see Amber Rudd, somehow the Home Secretary is suggesting that companies like Whatsapp should build in backdoors to their systems so the police can read our messages. First internet usage metadata, now the content. That didn't take long. The most troubling comments? She seems to expect tech companies to police terrorists themselves. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/26/intelligence-services-access-whatsapp-amber-rudd-westminster-attack-encrypted-messaging Quote What I’m saying is the best people who understand the technology, who understand the necessary hashtags to stop this stuff even being put up, not just taking it down, are going to be them. That’s why I would like to have an industry-wide board set up where they do it themselves. Yes, the hashtags. If we get someone who knows the hashtags, everything will be ok. This cretin has no place commenting on technology. Just another tory exploiting a tragedy to launch an assault on our privacy. Edited March 26, 2017 by Davkaus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Compact and bijou, Mostyn, compact and bijou. Quote 'Dog kennel' flats in Barnet will be 40% smaller than Travelodge room Hundreds of tiny studio flats, many smaller than a budget hotel room, are to be squeezed into an eleven-story block in north London as its developer takes advantage of the government’s relaxation of planning regulations. Plans for Barnet House, used by the London borough of Barnet’s housing department, reveal that 96% of the 254 proposed flats will be smaller than the national minimum space standards of 37 sq metres (44 sq yards) for a single person. The tiniest homes will be 16 sq metres – 40% smaller than the average Travelodge room. They are legal because of government deregulation designed to promote the conversion of underused office space to help meet housebuilding targets. Local residents have labelled the Barnet scheme “ridiculous” and “immoral”, comparing the planned homes to dog kennels. Once kitted out with basic furniture, such as a small kitchenette, bed and wardrobe, the smallest flats will have very little room to move around. There appears to be little space, for example, for a sofa or a washing machine, unless it is stacked on top of the fridge. Office buildings in Croydon have also been converted into studios with floor areas of as little as 15 sq metres under the Tory deregulation. Housing experts have attacked the relaxation of planning regulations as a “race to the bottom”, but ministers insist the measure is helping to deliver vital new housing, and point out that more than 10,000 new homes were created from office buildings last year. Under the “permitted development” system, developers who convert offices into homes do not have to meet minimum floor area standards, considered by researchers to be important for health, educational attainment and family relationships. Neither do they have to include any affordable housing. Housing campaigners, including Shelter and the Royal Institute of British Architects, have warned the schemes are producing overcrowded “rabbit hutch” and “shoebox” homes that will seriously damage residents’ quality of life. The schemes are prevalent in London and the south-east of England, where high housing prices incentivise owners to convert office buildings. Other examples of concern include theformer American Airlines office block near Heathrow, which has been turned into 288 flats, and Lewisham House in south-east London, for which an application was lodged for 230 residential units. With converted offices accounting for almost 14,000 new dwellings last year – almost three-quarters of the growth in housing supply– the government appears unlikely to give up the strategy. Tory-controlled Barnet council, which occupies part of Barnet House but does not own the building, is opposed to the development but said that because of national government policy it has no power to reject it on the grounds it is too cramped. “It is always difficult for a local authority when something is happening in its area over which it has no control,” the council’s leader, Richard Cornelius, told the Guardian. “The government has given developers power to convert businesses premises into residential premises under permitted development. The sizes of some of the flats would not be what we think are appropriate living spaces for our residents and we do not support the scheme in its current form.” Local residents have also raised objections. One told a consultation the “tiny cubicles [are] … a travesty of what proper housing is about”; another said “to pack this many people into this small a space is ridiculous”, while a third said the “dog kennel homes” were “immoral”. The application has been lodged by the building’s leaseholder, Meadow Partnership, to designs by HKR Architects. Both companies declined requests to comment. Julia Park, an architect and housing design expert, said the Barnet House plans – which propose 20 apartments per floor accessed off from a single corridor – were overcrowded even for single people. The plans include no shared facilities such as a laundry room, or bike storage, placing even greater pressure on space in the tiny flats. “Singles tend to become couples and it’s quite possible that families will end up in here,” she said. “Permitted development conversions are showing what a race to the bottom looks like. Living in one room with no private outdoor space will take its toll on individuals and cause tension in relationships. Everyone will smell supper being cooked and hear the TV and the bathroom. Unless the soundproofing is really good, everyone will hear their neighbours too, and because the flats are single aspect, overheating is a significant risk.” The Department for Communities and Local Government declined to comment officially, but a spokesman stressed that the permitted development system allowed new homes to be created more quickly. The housing minister, Gavin Barwell, has previously defended the policy as being responsible for thousands of “desperately needed new homes”. But the shadow housing minister, John Healey, accused the government of “giving developers a free hand to bypass proper planning process, sidestep affordable housing requirements and build rabbit hutch homes that aren’t fit for purpose”. “Short-sighted new developments are no shortcut to building the homes the country needs,” the Labour MP said Graeme Brown, interim chief executive of Shelter, said: “In theory, converting offices sounds like a good way of creating some of the homes we need in a time of crisis. But in reality, it’s often used by developers as a way of cashing in on people’s desperation by building unaffordable, rabbit-hutch homes. “Our homes are already among the smallest in Europe, and if the government allows developers to cut corners by slashing space standards in homes even more, they will be punishing ordinary families in the process.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Another victory against 'red tape' and bureacracy. Huzzah! Let's cut back on food safety regulations next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 If my memory serves me right, the last time there was a significant deregulation of housing standards was....thatcher's tory government. Minimum sizes were reduced, including the height of ceilings which was scrapped. Ceilings just had to be high enough to open a door. This country won't be happy until it's turned itself in to a full on Dickensian fayre. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 22 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: If my memory serves me right, the last time there was a significant deregulation of housing standards was....thatcher's tory government. Minimum sizes were reduced, including the height of ceilings which was scrapped. Ceilings just had to be high enough to open a door. This country won't be happy until it's turned itself in to a full on Dickensian fayre. Parker Morris? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 With interest rates going up to 6.1%, on an average debt of £44,000, graduates on Plan 2 loans will be accumulating over £200 of interest per month, requiring a salary of over £50,000 to just pay off the interest. Hopefully people weren't ever expecting to pay it off. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Don't worry, The new Tory cuts in education should mean not too many children of the poor will trouble the higher echelons of learning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted April 12, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted April 12, 2017 There was talk recently if the student loan book being flogged. Dunno what happened on that front... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itdoesntmatterwhatthissay Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Xann said: Don't worry, The new Tory cuts in education should mean not too many children of the poor will trouble the higher echelons of learning. I know a few primary schools who aren't worrying. Secondary schools are in quite a pickle. Also higher echelons of learning? Seriously? As in what? Learning that gets you a job? Or education that lets you laud it over those deemed 'less intelligent?' Do me a favour and actually look at some of the educational announcements. At the moment I am consulting on T-Levels and jesus christ do we have an opportunity to shift education away from the mess it currently stands. The mess Labour seem to think is the answer. Good god the Tory's don't get it but at least they're trying! On 3/27/2017 at 20:06, chrisp65 said: If my memory serves me right, the last time there was a significant deregulation of housing standards was....thatcher's tory government. Minimum sizes were reduced, including the height of ceilings which was scrapped. Ceilings just had to be high enough to open a door. This country won't be happy until it's turned itself in to a full on Dickensian fayre. Quite some time ago eh! If working out whether regulation has been strengthened (before harking on about something fairly irrelevant) I'd have refereed to the Housing Standards Review.....Tories were in charge; sorry! What we can say is that Cameron was awful and built too few homes with too much emphasis on demand; but Labour, they are the real villains of the piece. Not only do their councils stifle planning hugely but the party are guilty of even now, misunderstanding the issue completely. Plus remember, the modern day planning process has Labour all over it. (we will soon see if May is as bad/lazy). Tbf John Healey is a nice guy who knows the issues and is willing to listen to solutions.....however, Labour appear a party of opposition rather than scrutiny and so we rarely have a reasoned debate on the subject.....well, unless lots of Tory's turn up. If you were forced to portion total blame at any party (and I don't think that's fair), then Labour made a real mess of housing in London. Edited April 12, 2017 by itdoesntmatterwhatthissay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itdoesntmatterwhatthissay Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Chindie said: There was talk recently if the student loan book being flogged. Dunno what happened on that front... Worrying but apparently they're still talking about it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Chindie said: There was talk recently if the student loan book being flogged. Dunno what happened on that front... I haven't seen anything contrary to the February announcement about them going ahead with a planned four year programme of sales of pre-2012 English loans. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 4 hours ago, Davkaus said: With interest rates going up to 6.1%, on an average debt of £44,000, graduates on Plan 2 loans will be accumulating over £200 of interest per month, requiring a salary of over £50,000 to just pay off the interest. That is crazy! Though why would you need a salary of £50k just to pay off the interest? I'm obviously missing something in my understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 3 hours ago, Chindie said: There was talk recently if the student loan book being flogged. Dunno what happened on that front... don't they sell a tranche of the student loans every few years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 12, 2017 Author Moderator Share Posted April 12, 2017 4 hours ago, Davkaus said: With interest rates going up to 6.1%, on an average debt of £44,000, graduates on Plan 2 loans will be accumulating over £200 of interest per month, requiring a salary of over £50,000 to just pay off the interest. Hopefully people weren't ever expecting to pay it off. Um, not really. according to my sumses, £223.60 is the monthly interest on 44K at 6.1%, and to pay off the 44K over 25 years would be a total of £286 per month (£3432 p.a.). so at 20% tax rate, that's £4290 you'd have to earn before tax, per year, just to pay off the loan. So not cheap, but not £50K a year territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, blandy said: Um, not really. according to my sumses, £223.60 is the monthly interest on 44K at 6.1%, and to pay off the 44K over 25 years would be a total of £286 per month (£3432 p.a.). so at 20% tax rate, that's £4290 you'd have to earn before tax, per year, just to pay off the loan. So not cheap, but not £50K a year territory. Repayment calculations on a plan 2 loan are 9% of income over the threshold (frozen at £21k until at least April 2021). £50k annual income leaves a gross amount of £2,610 per month over the threshold which would give a repayment amount deducted from salary by the employer as £217, I believe (to set against the interest added of £223.67). Edit: The wording of Davkaus's post may have led to the misunderstanding. The point is that anyone with the average student debt on plan 2 will (most likely) not be paying off their debt unless they earn over £50k per year as not many people will be volunteering extra payments at those kinds of salary level. Edited April 12, 2017 by snowychap 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, blandy said: Um, not really. according to my sumses, £223.60 is the monthly interest on 44K at 6.1%, and to pay off the 44K over 25 years would be a total of £286 per month (£3432 p.a.). so at 20% tax rate, that's £4290 you'd have to earn before tax, per year, just to pay off the loan. So not cheap, but not £50K a year territory. I'm not sure I understand this post. One of us doesn't understand how this works, and I'm really hoping that it isn't me. You pay off 9% of your income over the repayment threshold. At £50,000 gross income, on a standard 1150L tax code (for the next tax year), you'll only pay 217.50 towards your student loan each month - less than the monthly interest. Edited April 12, 2017 by Davkaus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 12, 2017 Author Moderator Share Posted April 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Davkaus said: One of us doesn't understand how this works, and I'm really hoping that it isn't me. You pay off 9% of your income over the repayment threshold. At £50,000 gross income, on a standard 1150L tax code (for the next tax year), you'll only pay 217.50 towards your student loan each month - less than the monthly interest. Looks like it was me . I misunderstood the point you were making, which was my bad. Soz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts