It is currently Fri May 24, 2013 3:31 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:38 pm
Posts: 2741
Location: Manchester
ezinra wrote:
Top post, Gourami. Thanks.


Seconded. Humane, thoughtful and realistic. Well said.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:51 pm
Posts: 2005
Danson's Forehead wrote:
Policies generally specify affordable housing, which includes social renting alongside things like sub-market rental and shared ownership. Within that, a certain proportion is social renting and a certain proportion is 'intermediate' housing. Agree that you do have to be careful about where the social rent element goes, and it won't be appropriate in all areas. In my area, for instance, there are policies to avoid social renting for single people being provided in the town centre, mainly because those people will often have particular issues that are triggered by a more high-pressure environment, higher noise levels, overcrowded public areas etc.

Developers do their very best to avoid groups coming into contact on a single site. It is not uncommon, for instance, for a block of flats to have two different entrances, one for the private residents and one for the unwashed proles.

The development I referred to has one block built to this model. A privately owned end which is well equipped and has it's own entry, under the same roof but entirely seperate is the segment operated by a housing association. Aside from some very obvious cosmetic touches it is basic but new and well built. All they have in common with the private residents is a party wall which abuts a fire escape stairwell. The private end is pretty much composed of Joe Public, regular people much like those living in the area as a whole. The housing association end is a surreal and improbable mix.

Somebody has seen fit to put a Somalian family with several kids right next to a woman who is clearly heavily into substances and is running a knocking shop-cum-crackhouse from her kitchen. These flats are on the ground floor but have a little Juliet balcony railing thing. An assortment of messed up, disordered and chaotic people can be spotted clambering in and out over this at any time of the day or night. The curtain was ripped down within days of her moving in but you get the feeling nobody minds for a second, or has even noticed it was ever there. On the other side of a paper thin wall are the Somali family. Mum and an assortment of girls covered head to toe, Dad in spotless white robes, an embroidered verse from the koran on the wall and not enough furniture for everyone to sit down at once, in a spotless room. I assume they haven't slept much since the day they moved in and at times it must be like living 18 inches from a nightclub as the partying, frequent fights and general unfolding drama is of epic proportions. They are effectively under seige, entirely powerless and in actual danger at times. It's that or become voluntarily homeless and see where that gets you.

I often enjoy incongruous juxtapostions but this one is just not doing it for me. Hopes of finding some middle ground evaporate at times. Uprooted, bewildered frightened people with particular views about child rearing and behaviour thrown in with people who don't know what a limit is and are pretty much long, long since past caring about anything, being irretreviably mired in a personal hell which they numb with whatever can be got hold of first.

Ostensibly, this is about community cohesion and you will see the local government bods cutting ribbons to declare the new utopia open for business. I suspect it is more of a holding cell for the kind of people the rest of society don't want next to them. The people who engineer it all live in the nice end of town or in a pretty village with good commuting links. I think many of them are well meaning but don't have a clue how insulated they are. It seems a very British phenomena, to try to deal with social ills through housing policy, whilst savaging social workers so badly nobody with talent will go near social work.

Professionals who encounter this messy side of society often become hardened and cynical to protect themselves from the horror of it all. Most of the rest get burnt-out and move on. Only the absurdists can stick at it. It is a Sisyphean endeavour. What is needed is something to destroy the boulder but instead we landscape the hill.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:43 am
Posts: 1853
Location: Dorset
Is he high?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peter ... -argument/

_________________
My blog: https://stevenplrose.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:59 am
Posts: 12750
Location: Up my own arse.
He's definitely taken something. I recognised absolutely none of what he was saying there as even remotely accurate. Seemed to be an extended exercise in wishful thinking.

_________________
I'm a nasty, violent lefty. You cunt.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23067
Location: In la France profonde, without personal transport...
The return of Lunchtime O'Booze?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:43 am
Posts: 1853
Location: Dorset
I pretty much stopped reading after calling Labour a left-wing government solely responsible for the economy collapsing.

_________________
My blog: https://stevenplrose.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:33 pm
Posts: 11934
Location: East London
His book on "the political class" has many excellent passages in it. i got it from the Occupy London tent.

He's a funny one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:33 pm
Posts: 11934
Location: East London
In response to Gourami, I live about 50 yards from a development which isn't just mixed, but has (as a point of principle) not differentiated between social renting and private sale properties. And this in Tower Hamlets, where there are racial and class differences between the two. I don't pretend everyone's inviting each other round for lunch, but not aware of any problems.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:34 am
Posts: 5401
Location: A town near the Sea
Here is a left foot forward article debunking everything he said and rightly so...

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2012/01/ ... eral-left/

The only concern is that the left have never been able to group together to utterly destroy something that at most only 35% of the voting population (And probably even less of the overall population) ever wanted or wants.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:04 pm
Posts: 711
mattomac wrote:
Here is a left foot forward article debunking everything he said and rightly so...

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2012/01/ ... eral-left/

The only concern is that the left have never been able to group together to utterly destroy something that at most only 35% of the voting population (And probably even less of the overall population) ever wanted or wants.


Well, it's a shame AV didn't get through. If we'd had that there's a good chance we wouldn't have seen a right-wing party in power for a long time.

I think the fact that the left wing is divided into smaller groups is one of its weaknesses. If the lib dems hadn't won such a big share of votes this last election, Gordon Brown would probably still be in power (would've loved to have seen him in charge when the Murdoch scandal broke). The best thing for the left wing really would be for UKIP or the BNP to pick up a lot of votes from the tories (well, except for the fact that it'd imply a lot of Brittish people are knuckle-dragging racist morons).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:51 pm
Posts: 2005
Winegums wrote:
I think the fact that the left wing is divided into smaller groups is one of its weaknesses.

I think Nick Clegg has solved that problem quite nicely.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 2:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23067
Location: In la France profonde, without personal transport...
It was Ashdown who did that, when he refused an alliance with Labour in 1997 (the original Third Way, the realignment of the left following the Liberal-Labour split of 1906).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 2:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:24 pm
Posts: 3841
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
It was Ashdown who did that, when he refused an alliance with Labour in 1997 (the original Third Way, the realignment of the left following the Liberal-Labour split of 1906).



I thought he wanted an alliance, but after the landslide election result Tony Blair forgot he'd ever said anything on the subject.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 3:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23067
Location: In la France profonde, without personal transport...
It was the big beasts in the Labour Party (Blunkett, Prescott) who went cold on the idea - they saw it in terms of electoral success, fairly short-term. The Blair vision was for a permanent realignment as well. As that wasn't needed after the 1997 landslide it would have needed Lib Dem pushing, but they had delusions of competency.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Peter Oborne
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23067
Location: In la France profonde, without personal transport...
Oborne hits the spot again - what a shame he's so bloody inconsistent.
Article in today's Telegraph.

Quote:
Consider this: there is nothing on this earth more British than the instinct to stand up for the underdog or the pariah, however unpopular or unattractive he or she might be. And there is no institution – not even the MCC or the Lawn Tennis Association – more British than the European Court of Human Rights.

It was inspired by Sir Winston Churchill, eager in the aftermath of the Second World War and the Holocaust to export the British system of fairness and decency. Churchill ensured that its founding document was drafted by a British politician, David Maxwell Fyfe, later to become a Conservative Lord Chancellor. Every single one of the great ideas that were to be embodied in the European Convention – freedom from torture, restraint on the power of the state, freedom under law – was an ancient British principle transferred on to the European stage.


A Recommended Read. But the comments are batshit insane as only the Telegraph can manage...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group