Re the swift story - the Daily Mail, birds and
planning, it's like they were writing it directly for me.
According to the URL, this has caused 'Uprorar'. Assuming that 'uprorar' is a mis-spelling of 'uproar' and not an unpleasant tropical disease associated with contact with swifts, there is no reason for uproar of any kind. Getting money for swift boxes out of Section 106 funds happens all the time. The only difference here is what they look like.
The money came from Section 106 funds - cash for public spending that is part of the agreement a developer makes to be able to build in an area.
So, that seems pretty clear cut. The developer is paying for it through Section 106. Incidentally, Section 106 can only be used for the specific purpose for which it is secured - it isn't just money that goes into Council coffers. Mind you, I'm sure everyone will have read the article, and no-one will have grasped completely the wrong end of the stick ...
Oh my!! What HAVE I just read? Don't these people realise that money is short.
- Debbie, Essex, 5/7/2011 18:50
And old age pensioners get £97 per week ,What a stupid country frankly blow the birds and save the salaries of all the wildlife set ,pensioners come first and last in my book stupid council stupid country
- DEBT IS THE PROBLEM, NORWICH, 5/7/2011 18:36
However, it does lead me to wonder how DEBT IS THE PROBLEM proposes to blow all the birds. There are many millions of them, and it would be very fiddly to get their organs between one's lips. And what's to prevent the birds you've already blown cheekily re-joining the queue? The proposal is unworkable.