Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

I still don't get it.

Although I basically think the general public are smart, pick up what's important and get it right 99% of the time - and that I'm just a nerdyish member of them

[Admiral Yi]

I still don't get it.

Although I basically think the general public are smart, pick up what's important and get it right 99% of the time - and that I'm just a nerdyish member of them

You made an argument in support of Tory environmental policy.  Squeeze says people who believe this have been mislead; ergo you have been mislead.  Now you don't have to take umbrage at that or defend your point or concede yours, and in fact my swipe was aimed at Squeeze's comment not you.

[Josquius]

No?
Pretty clear we were discussing politics from the outside. Sheilbh obviously knows the tories have done a shit job.

My hopes for a new deal approach would be to essentially translate climate change action to practicable things the bulk of the electorate honestly care about: economic security (jobs and improved infrastructure). The flip side of course is that as you guys pointed out a few times in the past, quite simply a lot of Brits have (or think they have) good enough not to want any changes.

Yes. The car brained world view is a hard one to break once people settle into it.
Way too many people in the UK have this whole toxic individualist fuck the commons attitude that just doesn't consider the holistics of how things could improve with better infrastructure.

I had this twice in a 10 mile journey along the quiet roads of the forest, first a woman in a car was determined to overtake me, though by doing it a slow speed, I had to actively point to the audi coming around the road curve, which for some reason she wasn't seeing. She thanked me when she eventually passed.

On the way back, a large stag was running up and down the roadside grass trying to find a way through the hedge/fencing, I slowed to a stop and had to attract a SUV driver's attention by pointing at the large several hundred pound animal that was leaping 3-4ft off the ground as it ran in a panic. The car did slow to a near stop; I don't know if they hadn't seen it or just hadn't considered it a threat to their car and itself?

I expected worse tbh :p
A rare foray onto Facebook lately randomly led me onto nutty anti clean air zone / conspiracy theorist groups. Tens of thousands in some.
The level of hate cyclists get continues to be simply insane.

Purely anecdotally and maybe a product of me being braver when biking these days but I find the number of people trying to ram me off the road much higher than it used to be. Unmarked white vans are particularly likely to be scummy.
I never used to wear a helmet since I'm not exactly going full tilt road cycling. These days I do.

[garbon]

God the Met Police are awful.

[Gups]

Must be a northern thing. I cycle about 10 hours a week in London and that's never happened to me.

[mongers]

Must be a northern thing. I cycle about 10 hours a week in London and that's never happened to me.

Ubiquity of CCTV and higher copper presence, plus possible critical mass of bikes, deters miscreants?

[Sheilbh]

I see it's Lib Dem conference time again:

Lib Dem education spox Munira Wilson said that "we need to persuade more Kens in this world to take a short break from doing beach and head on back to the Mojo Dojo Casa House" as she spoke of the party's pledge to double parental leave.

Also - not sure she understood the film

[HVC]

Is that quote misansry or racist?

[Gups]

Must be a northern thing. I cycle about 10 hours a week in London and that's never happened to me.

Ubiquity of CCTV and higher copper presence, plus possible critical mass of bikes, deters miscreants?

Possibly. I think the widespread 20mph zone, lots of traffic lights etc in inner London just changes the mindset.

[Sheilbh]

Incidentally an example of why I think something is shifting as this consolidates on age grounds, the Lib Dem leadership's proposal to support scrapping all national housebuilding was defeated at conference. Largely opposition was organised by the Young Liberals and anti-NIMBY campaigners within the party - both attacked by former leader, Tim Farron, as fundamentalist, free market Thatcherites (definitely how I'd describe centrally set targets ).

Striking that even the Lib Dems have a limit to their NIMBYism.

Edit: Also apparently Farron was loudly booed in his speech for describing the more pro-building motion as "the most right wing thing" he's heard at conference, which is good. Though seeing some ex-MPs close to the leadership backing him saying all it'll do is "benefit developers and the haves".

[Josquius]

Braverman whinging on the UN refugee convention needing reform.

It's bizzare.

Shes absolutely right. It does need reform. It's not fit for purpose in the modern world.

Yet before even checking her words you just know her idea of what needs reforming in it is the complete opposite of reality and she wants to emphasise the shit parts whilst weakening the bits that need strengthening 

To use a blunt and obvious analogy basically it's like Hitler saying current anti semitism laws are broken.

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2023/sep/27/london-apartment-block-that-deviates-from-plans-must-be-torn-down-says-council

London apartment block that deviates from plans must be torn down, says council

Buildings rarely look as good as the airbrushed architects' visualisations produced to persuade planners to grant permission. Extra sharp highlights, implausibly blue skies and deeper colours are all part of the dark arts of the computer-generated rendering.

But the gulf between what was proposed for an apartment complex rising 23 storeys above the Thames in east London and what was actually built has finally proved too much.

After counting 26 major deviations from the original planning permission that it granted, the Royal Borough of Greenwich has taken the extraordinary move – "unprecedented", it said – of ordering the developers of the Mast Quay II development to pull it down. It means tenants in 204 flats now face the prospect of finding somewhere else to live.

The visualisations before planning permission was granted over a decade ago showed a standard piece of contemporary residential architecture with details intended to render an otherwise blocky project easier on the eye. What was built is far more rudimentary and, in parts, resembles stacked shipping containers. There had been complaints from local people, the council said, adding that some of the buildings occupied a bigger footprint than allowed and there were missing facilities, including for disabled people.

Announcing the decision on Tuesday, Anthony Okereke, the council leader, said it was "just not good enough".

Aidan Smith, cabinet member for regeneration, described it as a "mutant development that is a blight on the landscape". He said: "If a scheme matching what has been built at Mast Quay Phase II was submitted for planning permission today, it would be refused, and we cannot let what has been delivered at Mast Quay Phase II go unchallenged."

Asked why it did not act sooner, Greenwich said it was not until 2022, when building work was finally finished, that it became clear that the breaches to the planning permission were more than just external.

Comer Homes Group, which acts as landlord as well as developer, describes the buildings on its website as a "luxury development of two- and three-bedroom riverside apartments. A magnificent crafted living space with panoramic views of the River Thames and vistas of the capital."

But the deviations noted by the council included a missing glazed curtain wall that was supposed to give the appearance of a sail, smaller balconies and windows, no roof gardens or children's play areas and "non-accessible 'accessible' apartments that have steps to the balconies so that wheelchair users cannot use their outdoor space".

There was supposed to be an underground car park, but that wasn't built, the council said, and instead surface car parking occupied land that had been earmarked for gardens.

On Tuesday, the council said in a statement that its "extensive investigation over the last year has concluded that the completed Mast Quay Phase II built-to-rent development has been built without planning permission and is therefore unlawful because it is so substantially different to the scheme that was originally permitted by the planning permission given in 2012.

"The council believes that the only reasonable and proportionate way to rectify the harm created by the finished Mast Quay Phase II development to the local area, and the tenants living there, because of the changes made during its construction, is the complete demolition and the restoration of the land to its former condition."

The developer, Comer Homes Group, has been contacted for comment. Greenwich's statement said the developer had argued that it needed to make changes to the originally permitted design owing to alterations to the building regulation. The developer applied for retrospective planning consent, but only "as a consequence of the enforcement investigation", the council said.

The developer has 28 days to appeal against the enforcement notice to the government's Planning Inspectorate.

Strangely they don't list the neighborhood making you think it might be leafy, green Greenwich...but it is not.

[Admiral Yi]

As usual the radicals on both ends of the spectrum have it wrong and only the awesome centrists have it figured out.

The current asylum system generates both false positives and false negatives.  The left only cares about the false negatives and the right only cares about the false positives.  A truly just system would acknowledge both and work to balance them.

[Josquius]

It doesn't look like that huge of a deviation considering its still under construction. Terrible to just knock it down rather than examining if refitting it makes more sense.

[garbon]

It doesn't look like that huge of a deviation considering its still under construction. Terrible to just knock it down rather than examining if refitting it makes more sense.

Here are the key issues mentioned by council:

visible design changes to the external appearance of the towers – the final towers look more solid and bulky because of the removal of the stepped back top floor and the glazed curtain wall façade to Block E that would have given the appearance of a sail. 

visible changes to the materials and windows – different cladding, less glazing, smaller balconies, smaller windows and no wraparound balconies resulting in a reduction of daylight and sunlight, and to a reduced outlook. 

increasing the approved size of the footprint of both towers

not providing the roof gardens for residents and the public, children's play areas, green roofs or landscaped gardens

lower quality residential accommodation

non accessible 'accessible' apartments that have steps to the balconies so that wheelchair users cannot use their outdoor space.

provision of a residents' gym in place of the approved commercial floorspace which is also not accessible to anyone who uses a wheelchair

a reduction of the amount of commercial floorspace for offices, shops and cafes at ground-level

failure to provide enough underground car parking so that car parking dominates at ground level replacing what should have been a landscaped garden area with trees and plants and less car parking overall that could place pressure on street parking

a lack of disabled parking bays 

shared residential/commercial basement access that could lead to conflicts

a poorer quality footbridge to Woolwich Church Street