Johnson On The Ropes

[Alikado]

To be fair £20bn goes now toward housing benefit. So into the pockets of landlords, who as a result participate in the house purchase market which drives prices further beyond the reach of their tenants. It's a merry-go-round.

We used to fund and carry the debt for council houses, which were traditionally the way people started , saving to invest in a house purchase. When they did, their house would be freed for another family.
And the housing stock remained public property.

The right to buy programme torpedoed that system. Not that I objected to the principle of people buying their own homes but the failure to then invest the proceeds into further stock, combined with local authorities being unable to build new stock, started the rot. Instead the proceeds helped local authorities to keep down council taxes, which the public were told was the result of careful Tory management.

So we have replaced the system of taxpayer funds going into publicly-owned starter housing stock with a system whereby we send it instead to landlords.

Brilliant.

Private Landlords will not be effected, it is Housing Association housing that will be sold off if it ever happens and anybody actually qualifies. What I would like to know is where the money to replace the sold off properties is going to come from, if a tenant has the maximum allowed under UC (£6k) and gets the maximum Mortgage (95%) the house is going to be sold for £120k, if a replacement costs £220k to build who is going to cough up?
To my mind it would be better channeling more money into Rent to Buy / Shared Ownership schemes.

[bensherman]

Private Landlords will not be effected, it is Housing Association housing that will be sold off if it ever happens and anybody actually qualifies. What I would like to know is where the money to replace the sold off properties is going to come from, if a tenant has the maximum allowed under UC (£6k) and gets the maximum Mortgage (95%) the house is going to be sold for £120k, if a replacement costs £220k to build who is going to cough up?
To my mind it would be better channeling more money into Rent to Buy / Shared Ownership schemes.

That wasn't my point.
I was saying that over decades we have seen public money which used to support social housing diverted to housing benefit, rewarding landlords . Which further fuels demand for houses and pushes up prices.
Right to buy has led to more than half of the RTB properties being resold at a profit and there is no reason this policy will have a different result.
As to building replacement homes, I agree although I am unsure they would cost £220k, but certainly in the south east the cost of the land could push it to that.

[bensherman]

In one of those infrequent moments on this forum I agree,

it's an absurd policy far more worthy of Boris's condemnation than the events at Downing Street.

Selling off the nation's housing stock that should be preserved in perpetuity for people who need them.

His faux green policies, the ludicrous energy policies, and immigration policies from my beloved should get him/them kicked around the houses, they affect far more people.

When are we going to get a decent opposition to concentrate on things that affect real peoples lives and give us real alternatives?

This political navel gazing from the unaffected is a waste.

You talk if it "being worthy of Johnson's condemnation" as though he had nothing to do with it. HE ANNOUNCED IT.

But it does display his desperation to produce anything he can to divert attention from the corruption and division in his government and party.

Not least because the same facile policy was announced by Cameron in 2015, and "piloted" before proving to be a disaster.

There is a report today that he and Sunak booked a slot in the coming week to reveal some other gem, but at the moment have nothing to fill it with.

What we are seeing now is our leader desperately trying to create a series of events akin to a trainer throwing fish to seals in a water park.

[local]

You talk if it "being worthy of Johnson's condemnation" as though he had nothing to do with it. HE ANNOUNCED IT.

But it does display his desperation to produce anything he can to divert attention from the corruption and division in his government and party.

Not least because the same facile policy was announced by Cameron in 2015, and "piloted" before proving to be a disaster.

There is a report today that he and Sunak booked a slot in the coming week to reveal some other gem, but at the moment have nothing to fill it with.

What we are seeing now is our leader desperately trying to create a series of events akin to a trainer throwing fish to seals in a water park.

Have another go.

[Desert Region]

19th June: Regulation 7 of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 – Restriction on participating in an indoor gathering consisting of two or more people.

Bunter participated in a gathering of two or more people. That is the offence.

I really can't figure out why you've a problem with this. He's been charged, fined, paid the fine, admitted it and made a hollow apology.

It seems you're the only person in the country that can't accept he was wrong in the first place.

It appears local must have missed reading your post #476, as they surely would have responded to the above extract.

[Toodles McGinty]

It appears local must have missed reading your post #476, as they surely would have responded to the above extract.

On the 'Keir Starmer' thread his defence has gone from 'he isn't a lawyer, so how could he know what the rules are' to 'his advisors didn't tell him what is wrong and right'.

Apparently as I'm not running the country (or may have been running a tap...?) I had the time to count how many people are in a room. Poor Bunter didn't.

And when he went into a room with beer, a cake and a chorus of 'Happy Birthday To You', he couldn't count past two, and his advisers didn't usher him out yelling 'it isn't a work event' so he just went along with it. As you do when you're the leader of a country.

So you can see it isn't as though Bunter is an entitled prick who doesn't think rules should apply to him, as everybody who has ever known him states repeatedly. It's because he can't count, doesn't know the rules that he announced night after night, isn't a lawyer and he's decided to employ really crap advisers.

We've all been there.

[local]

It appears local must have missed reading your post #476, as they surely would have responded to the above extract.

I thought everyone would see the obvious problem with it ?

[local]

6819118]On the 'Keir Starmer' thread his defence has gone from 'he isn't a lawyer, so how could he know what the rules are' to 'his advisors didn't tell him what is wrong and right'.
[/B]
Apparently as I'm not running the country (or may have been running a tap...?) I had the time to count how many people are in a room. Poor Bunter didn't.

And when he went into a room with beer, a cake and a chorus of 'Happy Birthday To You', he couldn't count past two, and his advisers didn't usher him out yelling 'it isn't a work event' so he just went along with it. As you do when you're the leader of a country.

So you can see it isn't as though Bunter is an entitled prick who doesn't think rules should apply to him, as everybody who has ever known him states repeatedly. It's because he can't count, doesn't know the rules that he announced night after night, isn't a lawyer and he's decided to employ really crap advisers.

We've all been there.

That's funny your own circular self defeating argument.

[bensherman]

Given your poor grasp of logic that's not a judgement you can make.

[bensherman]

He pushes the frontier of stupidity daily.

He has said now that when he signed the EU withdrawal agreement, with the NI protocol in it, he did not know the EU would require a border in the Irish Sea. Even though it is there, and the 2019 Impact assessment - made by the government but not shared in the House post the election as scrutiny was skipped- said that was what would happen.

Surely the offence of "malfeasance in public office" applies here. This man is a walking disaster.

[Desert Region]

I thought everyone would see the obvious problem with it ?

A guessing game to follow on from your fishing expedition. How cute.

[Toodles McGinty]

He pushes the frontier of stupidity daily.

He has said now that when he signed the EU withdrawal agreement, with the NI protocol in it, he did not know the EU would require a border in the Irish Sea. Even though it is there, and the 2019 Impact assessment - made by the government but not shared in the House post the election as scrutiny was skipped- said that was what would happen.

Surely the offence of "malfeasance in public office" applies here. This man is a walking disaster.

The 'word cloud' from a poll in today's 'Times'. They asked a nationally representative sample of the British public what they think about Boris Johnson.

Of all 2,000 responses, 72% were negative, with 16% positive. The words most commonly used are in the image below.

Some of the negative responses:

“He was the right person to get Brexit done but now he needs to go, He is a liar and has broken the law we need a change.”


“I used to think he was ok but now he should resign after the breach of lockdown.”


“Liar and untrustworthy”

“At first I really liked him and felt he would be good for the country, but now he has been in power he has been one of the worst prime ministers ever… he is so out of touch and has no idea how the majority of people live their lives.”


“Utter anus”

Positive:

“I used to think he was a buffoon but he had to step up to the mark with covid so went up in my estimation”


“I think he did a pretty good job in such an unusual situation. That's all anyone can do.”

[bensherman]

In case anyone had a doubt about the effect of the shambles Johnson has presided over...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUKywFazdDo

[Toodles McGinty]

For balance, here's Starmer's word cloud:

[local]

Plenty of bland and boring people have made it to the position of PM.


With the excitable media pursuing him for some "back office" paperwork, who would want his job anyway.

The rose-tinted glasses come out for the boring ones.

Strangely over time the bad-tempered shouty liar John Major has achieved some sort of statesman position.