UK Politics

3145 readers

7 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

tom

GreatAlbatross

flamingos

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

Prioritise people’s needs ‘over newts’ in housing policy, says Angela Rayner (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by frankPodmore@slrpnk.net to c/uk_politics

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The government plans to unveil sweeping changes this week to the national planning policy framework, the document which sets out national priorities for building, after a consultation.

I'm really looking forward to the yimby charter, I've got to say. We're going to build so much stuff, it's going to be amazing.

'Labour seem to be saying that Angela is best and local people can be ignored.'

I endorse this message.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] YungOnions@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, because in a country where wildlife is declining rapidly, a country that has one of the lowest biodiversity levels in the world, the solution is to allow developers to just build over the remaining habitats whilst making vauge hand-waving promises about protection.

I get the need to build more, but unless the government is going to take biodiversity loss seriously, you're just destroying more of what we have the most little of.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 weeks ago

The government is taking biodiversity seriously by banning bee-killing pesticides, encouraging a shift to regenerative farming and through their commitment to green energy generally. They've also promised to make considerations around biodiversity part of the new planning policy.

What they have to stop is the use of biodiversity as a mere excuse for nimbyism. And, yes, this will entail building on some 'green' land. However, just because there's a bit of grass on something doesn't necessarily make it particularly biodiverse. We'll do far more for biodiversity by making protected green land truly biodiverse (rather than vast areas of near-dead monocultures, which is what all too much 'green space' in the UK actually is) while building good homes on some of the low-quality green space - which is the plan.