Build, build, build.

carmanmemoranda said:
I support a proper fit for purpose system.

Not just slogans
Click to expand...
You should stop using slogans yourself.
" I support a proper fit for purpose system"
has become a bit of a slogan itself.
This is the standard reply by those who can't actually define what a fit for purpose system is.
 
Andydevon said:
Don't you think that is the prerogative the current administration to set their targets that we can use to measure their performance against their stated aims?

It's their first week so I don't expect much well apart from 1.5 million new homes in 5 years.

The government have been cagy on the rest even before being elected. For example reduce immigration but they don't say how much or when by.

Let's hope they can define what they want to achieve with real targets.
Click to expand...
1.5 million new homes in 5 years sounds a lot but is it?
net migration of 700,000 per year (assuming 2 per home) will require 1.75 million new homes!

can they also really build the infrastructure to support 1.5 million new homes ?
think about it, West Midlands metropolitan area (Birmingham and its surrounding areas such as Solihull, Wolverhampton, Dudley, Walsall, Coventry) only have 1.1 million new homes. Think of all the Hospitals, prisons, hotels, shops, leisure centres, police, ambulances, fire brigades, water and sewage works, all the roads, factories industrial estates - can they also build all that to serve these 1.5 million new homes?
 
motorbiking said:
Some idiots are also shouting we need more people to grow the economy. So these extra houses will be filled up with more people. These "more people" will drive down wage growth, public sector services will be squeezed and have to expand even more, all the extra services and more people will create a greater burden on the economy and we'll go back to higher unemployment, lower UK investment and real terms income will fall. But labour will stop you firing unwanted employees, so you wont be diverting jobs to the UK, like I've done for the past 10 years. looks like I will be visiting low tax Middle East a lot more, with all the team members relocating.
Click to expand...

Tell me your plans to grow the economy? This will be interesting.
 
Mrs Doubtfyre said:
Performance criteria need to be:
1. Clearly defined and easily understood, i.e not complex or subject to misunderstandings.
2. Has a clear 'line of sight' to strategic goals, i.e. not blurry or vague.
3. Is simple, not subject to a range of abstract multiple measures.
4. Has an owner, someone who takes responsibility for the criteria.
5. Is objective, i.e. not subjective to political bias.
6. Provides regular feedback over predetermined time periods.
7. Drives 'performance inducing' behaviour.
8. .....
9. ....
etc. etc.
Click to expand...
This ties in with a point I've previously made. I would love to know charting back over 100 years how many manifesto pledges were actually delivered by the newly formed government of the time and to what extent. Not just vague rhetoric, actual measured data.

For example, taking a slogan/strategy, to what degree was 'levelling up' a success. To what extent was it delivered.

Tbh I find it almost laughable that a thread like this needs to exist. By that I mean, we can't even consistently build enough houses, really? What a complete and utter joke.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
I find it almost laughable that a thread like this needs to exist. By that I mean, we can't even consistently build enough houses, really? What a complete and utter joke.
Click to expand...
We cannot even make enough materials nowadays to build the houses.
 
That would be because demand has shrunk so much that the business of supplying materials has collapsed.

For the same reason, the number of trained and experienced workers has also shrivelled.
 
ReganAndCarter said:
So do I. In secure accommodation, processed, back to last safe country they travelled through. Them's the rules.
Click to expand...
What do the "rules" say about the right to claim asylum?
What do the "rules" say about accommodating asylum seekers pending a decision?
What do the "rules" say about processing asylum seekers?
Or what do the "rules" say about repatriating failed asylum seekers to another country?
If we're going to follow the rules, we must follow all of them, not just the ones that happen to be convenient.
Nor invent imaginary new "rules" to suit our convenience.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
This ties in with a point I've previously made. I would love to know charting back over 100 years how many manifesto pledges were actually delivered by the newly formed government of the time and to what extent. Not just vague rhetoric, actual measured data.

For example, taking a slogan/strategy, to what degree was 'levelling up' a success. To what extent was it delivered.

Tbh I find it almost laughable that a thread like this needs to exist. By that I mean, we can't even consistently build enough houses, really? What a complete and utter joke.
Click to expand...
But if it's not discussed, it falls below the radar, or it's subject to political explanations which might or might not be accurate.
 
Munroast said:
can they also really build the infrastructure to support 1.5 million new homes ?
Click to expand...
It is only about 250 extra each year in each council area. We aren't suddenly going from zero to 1.5 million.
 
Vinty said:
You should stop using slogans yourself.
" I support a proper fit for purpose system"
has become a bit of a slogan itself.
This is the standard reply by those who can't actually define what a fit for purpose system is.
Click to expand...
I'm not jn a position to choose a system.

Are you? Or do you think the previous haphazard efforts and lack of system was the way to manage things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top