Preparedness for when

NewShadow

maryb wrote: »

I didn't think councils were obliged to home single people, with no dependants unless they qualified as vulnerable, they just had to advise them. And an EU migrant can't be a refugee, by definition they are safe countries

I think (but allow that I don't work in Local gov) refugees are considered vulnerable and/or at risk of marginalisation.

That's why they're granted refugee status rather than being migrants.

http://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-client-groups/asylum-seekers-refugees/scie/174140guide37.pdf - some third sector guidance on social care for refugees.

mrs-moneypenny

I agree "[STRIKE]with[/STRIKE]"that"* locals being priced out of their own towns. We holiday every year in a town in Norfolk and love it there (we've done this for almost 30 years now) We rent for the week through a local estate agent. Most of the local indie shopkeepers know us and almost accept us as locals because they see us as loyal to them and their economy.
Conversations with them over the years have revealed this town is becoming more popular with the buy to let as holiday homes brigade as they refer to it. The town is bustling and busy all summer but dead with whole areas standing empty once the season finishes. The house price has been pushed up so as local families grow the Children can't afford to live in their own town and have to move inland. It is a sad and frustrating situation I didn't really think about.
I've been told even new builds are being snapped up as holiday homes.

I spent my teens in a village in the Midlands in the middle was a smelting factory. That closed down and eventually the land had houses built on it (I often wonder how safe it would be to eat produce grown in their gardens :eek:) anyway we often drive through that village and now those houses have big banners on complaining about a proposed new development that will spoil their views of the open countryside. The farm opposite them is being sold with planning permission and the council are trying to extend the building area by closing and selling off the allotment plots that have been there at least 40 years to my knowledge. What about the people who have worked those allotments for all those years. And the village has just a couple of shops, 2 pubs and a small school and doctors. There isn't the amenities to cope with the extra people that come into small communities.
I don't know what the answer is, but constantly building new houses isn't going to solve the problem.
When I lived there most people knew everyone else, we all watched each other's backs. If as a teen we misbehaved the popular shout of "I know your mother" soon put the fear of God into you and kept you on track, and if you noticed an old person hadn't taken their milk in youd mention it to a parent or neighbour and it would be checked they were OK. Community spirit disappears when area grow too big.

Rather embarrassed this morning neighbour just apologised for disturbing us when their alarm went off due to rainwater in the box for about an hour from 2am! We didn't realise how heavy we both slept as neither me nor Dh heard a thing. So much for us being prepared in event of an emergency.:o

thriftwizard

We're watching the house over the road with trepidation. Our dear old neighbour slipped peacefully away whist waiting at the bus stop about 18 months ago, and his little 2-bed house with long garden was put straight onto the market by his daughter, who'd gone Up In The World to a modern 4-bed in a posh suburb. It was snapped up a developer, who put straight in for the biggest possible extensions; two more beds (both ensuite) in the roof, bringing the building right up to the ridge line and out past the original walls, over a massive two-storey extension at the back, literally halfway down the garden. In the rest of the garden, just past the 8m mark, he's erected a massive fully-insulated shed, with double-glazed windows & power supply, at least twice the size of our garage, which is 30' x 10'. Apparently this is just to store his tools & equipment in... there's no possible access for cars, just a walkway between the houses, barely wide enough for a wheelbarrow.

Downstairs he's kept the original hallway, little "parlour" and back room, where most people planning to live in the houses join them somehow to make something bigger than 10' x 10'. Then there's the massive kitchen/shower room extension, and a third 1st floor bedroom/bathroom over that. The frontage looks the same, so planning's more or less a given although it's actually a huge overdevelopment for the area. But it doesn't look like a house for one person or a family to live comfortably in - it looks to us like a HMO in the making. There'd be - what? 7 letting rooms in the main house, 4 of those en-suite, and probably another 4 in the "shed"... but only one space for a car!

Not a nimby, but not liking this at all...

jk0

I just came across this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3603918/Missing-EU-graduates-owe-89m-loans-12-000-students-disappeared-abroad-taking-degree-British-university.html

Crikey, I think that's worth voting out for on its own.

NewShadow

thriftwizard wrote: »

But it doesn't look like a house for one person or a family to live comfortably in - it looks to us like a HMO in the making. There'd be - what? 7 letting rooms in the main house, 4 of those en-suite, and probably another 4 in the "shed"... but only one space for a car!

I would suggest contacting your council and asking for their process re licensing HMOs - It could be you can't object to the development as a family residence, but you can lodge an objection to it being made a HMO in the future - lack of adequate parking is a valid objection.

I'm suggesting to get in touch as different councils have different criteria for what is a HMO and process HMO applications differently - meaning they may not consult with neighbours by default.

It also flags it for them, as the developer could start renting it as a HMO without a licence.

[Deleted User]

MrsLurcherwalker wrote: »

On a non emotive level I am aware that there are some advantages to being part of a big co operative of nations particularly in terms of security.

Being in the EU is good for a our nation's security?

We can't even expel murderers and rapists, or expel/imprison people arriving on fake Passports.

How does that strengthen our nation's security :huh:

[Deleted User]

mrs-moneypenny wrote: »

I agree with locals being priced out of their own towns.

Does that mean you agree it is happening, or does that mean you agree it should be happening?

[Deleted User]

Security from the point of view of information sharing and deterring illegals from taking that last step from Europe to the UK by boat although that's started happening now. DDs take is that we have an awful lot of unsecured coastline and not enough customs/border force personnel to police all of it now so we would be less secure.

NewShadow

MrsLurcherwalker wrote: »

Security from the point of view of information sharing and deterring illegals from taking that last step from Europe to the UK by boat although that's started happening now. DDs take is that we have an awful lot of unsecured coastline and not enough customs/border force personnel to police all of it now so we would be less secure.

The bigger the EU gets, the worse the sharing of info is going to be.

With eastern European countries as EU members, no one wants to share details on sensitive operations. It’s a question of trust,

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f9baf7e8-f975-11e5-b3f6-11d5706b613b.html#axzz4BH24AXT6

The issues are longstanding, and even in the face of a threats of IS or AQ (al Qaeda) in the past," said Lawson, of the Royal United Services Institute. "There is an initial flurry of sharing of information but it drops away quickly.

http://www.ibtimes.com/after-paris-terror-attacks-eu-intelligence-sharing-must-improve-security-experts-say-2191709

All the information on the terrorists was there,” In ‘t Veld stressed, saying more could have been done by simply applying existing legislation. In many cases, she explained, terrorists were known to the security services before the attack but the services failed to share information or use it altogether.

http://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/linksdossier/from-9-11-to-charlie-hebdo-the-eu-s-response-to-terrorism/#ea-accordion-issues

mrs-moneypenny

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Does that mean you agree it is happening, or does that mean you agree it should be happening?

No lord no, I hope if you read my post you would realise that I meant I agree with what had been said in a previous post that it is happening. I do NOT agree with it. I meant I agreed with the poster who had made the comment.

Perhaps I should have started my post with the words
"I agree that locals are being priced out of their local areas, but not do not agree with the fact that it is happening"
I'll have to make sure to read through incase it's possible to be misconstrued if I post in future. Sorry for bad wording.

I've editing it now and highlighted the mistake I made in my original wording thank you for pointing it out.