May 2015 UK General Election Campaign.

[mongers]

Has anyone a connection to the Midlands?

Brumies. 

If anything, if you're not from a middle class background, I'd say the West Midlands, Birmingham, Wolverhampton and so forth have a stronger regional identify compared to some others.

Joking aside, there'll be very little regional character left in my area once the 'old boys' die and take with the most of the local accents. I think internal migration into Dorset, Hampshire and Wiltshire has largely destroyed those characteristics. 

Though the landscape remains, and with it the major claim to be a region.

[Ed Anger]

I like your cheeses.

[Syt]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31919109

Westminster: Where houses earn more than people

Members of Parliament heading home are greeted by a poster at the tube station that reads "£30,000 wouldn't even buy you floor space the size of this poster in Westminster".

It is a graphic reminder of the affordability crisis affecting housing in London and the South East - a disparity that has turned home owners in the region into lottery winners while those not on the property ladder are denied a roof over their head.

Research by the National Housing Federation to mark the Homes for Britain rally on Tuesday reveals that property values in England increased by £289 billion in the first three years of the current government, but £282 billion of that wealth growth (97%) took place in the capital and the South East.

The price of the average house in London, now a staggering £502,000, has been increasing each year by more than the average annual wage.

Most home-owners in the capital have seen their property earn more than they do. Small wonder that Generation Rent struggles to find anything it can afford.

In a sense, the housing crisis plays into that wider public view that Londoners, and in particular the 'Westminster-elite', are coining it - while the rest of the country struggles to pay the electricity and gas bills.

The value of property in the North West and north-east of England has fallen slightly.

All the political parties will go into the election promising answers to the housing crisis, in most cases with pledges to build many more homes.

But it takes time to produce a house, often four or five years from first planning application to the moment when the occupant walks through the freshly-painted front door. So we can be sure that the crisis is going to get worse before it gets better.

According to projections by the Town and Country Planning Association, using data from the last census, England needs 245,000 extra homes every year from 2011 right the way to 2031. Completions are currently only half of what is required and the country has already fallen more than half a million homes behind, pushing the annual demand even higher.

The reason we need so many extra homes is due to household formation: the elderly are living longer and, increasingly, in their own homes; relationship breakdown has created a big demand for more single-person homes; high levels of net-migration puts pressure on housing supply; we are living through something of a baby boom which increases demand for new family homes.

The argument that the lack of supply is now at crisis proportions appears to be shifting the public mood.

A British Social Attitudes survey published by the government last week suggests that most people in England (56%) are now supportive of house building in their local area, up from 28% in 2010.

The proportion of people who say they are opposed to new homes in their neighbourhood has fallen from 46% in 2010 to 21% in 2014.

Although public attitudes are changing, surveys suggest people don't tend to regard housing as a priority at the election.

This seems surprising given the passions the issue creates, but experts think it is because voters don't regard providing homes as a job for central government. It is seen either as something private developers should do or local authorities and housing associations.

Until that changes, our political leaders are unlikely to devote much money or energy to solving the housing crisis.

[Valmy]

It is a graphic reminder of the affordability crisis affecting housing in London and the South East - a disparity that has turned home owners in the region into lottery winners while those not on the property ladder are denied a roof over their head.

That's ok. Greenbelt preserved.

In a sense, the housing crisis plays into that wider public view that Londoners, and in particular the 'Westminster-elite', are coining it - while the rest of the country struggles to pay the electricity and gas bills.

Yeah it is a rich conspiracy when...

A British Social Attitudes survey published by the government last week suggests that most people in England (56%) are now supportive of house building in their local area, up from 28% in 2010.

The proportion of people who say they are opposed to new homes in their neighbourhood has fallen from 46% in 2010 to 21% in 2014.

We have a crisis where people cannot find places to live and pay their bills and still barely half of people want new houses built at all in their area.

[garbon]

So what of the new tax changes?

[Sheilbh]

So what of the new tax changes?

The Sun liked it...?

[garbon]

That money supermarket ad is odd.

[Sheilbh]

I find the face photo of Osborne they found to photoshop kind of horrifying

[Sheilbh]

Torn between thinking this is very odd and being perfectly willing to watch a feature length version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JeYlBRvUeE&app=desktop

[Agelastus]

Torn between thinking this is very odd and being perfectly willing to watch a feature length version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JeYlBRvUeE&app=desktop

A new version of "Yes, Prime-Minister", perhaps? Or "The Thick of it" if you don't want to further defile the memory of the original masterpiece?

[Valmy]

Torn between thinking this is very odd and being perfectly willing to watch a feature length version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JeYlBRvUeE&app=desktop

That is awesome

[Admiral Yi]

In British political culture is it appropriate for potential coalition partners to discuss conditions prior to the election, or is that supposed to wait?

As an American the former seems more fair and transparent.

[Sheilbh]

More the latter. This may change if coalitions become the new normal, but this is the first peacetime coalition in 80 years.

At the minute I think Labour and the Tories publicly wouldn't talk about it because it's like conceding they won't win. Minor parties are more open but then it's mainly about their red lines.

My suspicion is we may not actually have the maths for a coalition after this election, I think a minority government is more likely.

[Admiral Yi]

I propose that the only acceptable post-election conditions should be the holding of referenda.

Referendae?  Referendums?  OK.

[celedhring]

More the latter. This may change if coalitions become the new normal, but this is the first peacetime coalition in 80 years.

At the minute I think Labour and the Tories publicly wouldn't talk about it because it's like conceding they won't win. Minor parties are more open but then it's mainly about their red lines.

My suspicion is we may not actually have the maths for a coalition after this election, I think a minority government is more likely.

We are more used to coalitions, and in general our parties keep their cards close to the chest. Big parties don't want to talk about coalitions because they want the largest majority possible; and smaller parties don't want to talk about coalitions because they don't want to be seen as big parties' lapdogs, and - as you say - insist on their red lines.