Liverpool under a Tory government.

[Richard_A]

The Tories say they would scrap plans for a third runway at Heathrow and build a high-speed rail line instead. They are proposing to create a new line linking London St Pancras, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds - saying it would cut Heathrow flights by 66,000 a year.

The proposed 180mph rail link would run between St Pancras in London - the terminus for Eurostar - and Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Heathrow, the UK's largest airport, would also be linked in.
It would be a new railway with a new track freeing up the West Coast Mainline for more commuter journeys. Construction would start in 2015, to finish in 2027, should the Conservatives win the next general election.
The party says journeys would be reduced from 125 minutes to 80 minutes from London to Manchester, and from 55 minutes to 17 minutes between Manchester and Leeds.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7641094.stm

Also...

From: Conservatives.com

Theresa Villiers: A High-Speed Future?
Theresa Villiers MP, Thursday, October 15 2009

http://www.conservatives.com/News/Ar...ed_Future.aspx

Manchester: 3 references
Liverpool: 0 references

[Gareth]

So basically. we get shafted no matter who's in power. We'd be better off being a exclave of the Republic of Ireland or the 51st US State or something. I say that with less and less sarcasm as the years go by.

[Richard_A]

The outlook has improved massively for Liverpool over the last 13 years. The differences between now and then are wide ranging and significant.

Surely the issue isn't the government 'shafting' the city, it's the question of whether New Labour's obsession with hubs and regionalisation is now holding the city back from more effectively exploiting its own opportunities.

To characterise the last 13 years as Liverpool 'getting shafted' seems completely bizarre to me, to the point of bloody mindedness. My family was amongst the many from Liverpool who were literally scattered to the four winds under the last Conservative government. I remember what getting shafted really looked, and felt like.

In comparison, not getting Merseytram is nothing.

[Gareth]

So what? You have low expectations. It doesn't make it okay.

[Tony Sebo]

Originally Posted by Richard_A

The outlook has improved massively for Liverpool over the last 13 years. The differences between now and then are wide ranging and significant.

Surely the issue isn't the government 'shafting' the city, it's the question of whether New Labour's obsession with hubs and regionalisation is now holding the city back from more effectively exploiting its own opportunities.

To characterise the last 13 years as Liverpool 'getting shafted' seems completely bizarre to me, to the point of bloody mindedness. My family was amongst the many from Liverpool who were literally scattered to the four winds under the last Conservative government. I remember what getting shafted really looked, and felt like.

In comparison, not getting Merseytram is nothing.

but Richard, the whole world economy boomed during this period. To suggest taht Liverpool's smidgen of renaissance was down to nulabour largesse (or european monies) is ridiculous.

I would also like to understand how Liverpool was singled out and 'shafted' by the previous government?

[21C Liverpool]

Originally Posted by Richard_A

....it's the question of whether New Labour's obsession with hubs and regionalisation is now holding the city back from more effectively exploiting its own opportunities.

indeed...

[openlyJane]

Richard A - you're not my brother are you?

[Splendidineogh]

Originally Posted by Tony Sebo

but Richard, the whole world economy boomed during this period. To suggest taht Liverpool's smidgen of renaissance was down to nulabour largesse (or european monies) is ridiculous.

I would also like to understand how Liverpool was singled out and 'shafted' by the previous government?

Well said.

[Babaloo]

I don't think Liverpool was singled out during Thatcher's reign and it certainly didn't do itself any favours with its embrace of Militant - a recipe for making a bad situation worse.

However, the manner in which people were sacrificed to the whims of capitalism regardless of the consequences for them or their communities is unforgivable - especially now when the realities of privatising profit and nationalising loss is laid bare for all to see. Funny how the rules of the 'market' can be suspended when it's expedient to do so.

[Richard_A]

Originally Posted by openlyJane

Richard A - you're not my brother are you?

Very possibly.

[openlyJane]

Well that's that then!

[TommyMogan]

Liverpool under a Tory government? I hope not. Back into the fire if that bunch of southern inbreds get in.

[Eastisleast]

Originally Posted by TommyMogan

Liverpool under a Tory government? I hope not. Back into the fire if that bunch of southern inbreds get in.

Anything is better than the McTwats.

[Splendidineogh]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

I don't think Liverpool was singled out during Thatcher's reign and it certainly didn't do itself any favours with its embrace of Militant - a recipe for making a bad situation worse.

However, the manner in which people were sacrificed to the whims of capitalism regardless of the consequences for them or their communities is unforgivable - especially now when the realities of privatising profit and nationalising loss is laid bare for all to see. Funny how the rules of the 'market' can be suspended when it's expedient to do so.

But... Labour have taken privatisation further than the Tories did.

I just find it a bit nauseating when the likes of Richard claim to have been personally victimised by a government. The whole country suffered during the 70s and 80s; because its economy was undergoing a very painful readjustment. As Babaloo has pointed out, Liverpool was not in any way singled out, although some of its people, like Richard, seem to moan more than anybody else about it. Victim Richard.

No matter what party was in government during the 1980s, things would have been rough. Labour might have got in and kept the coal mines, docks and inefficient factories going a bit longer, until they bankrupted the country and left us all in an even worse mess.

I'm the last person who would say the Thatcher governments were even close to being perfect, but in general, their medicine was needed. And today, Liverpool can see billions being invested in it by the private sector and see it was worth it. This country had a lot of puss that needed to be squeezed out of it. The New Labour governments certainly benefitted from the generally stable economic base they were given and the global economic boom that followed. Obviously they've left us all in the shit now though and a new governmet will have to clear up after them.

I think a bit of perspective is needed, and the whole Thatcher was evil and the Tories are evil argument needs some serious reconsideration. The most depressing part of all is that this mentality seems to give Labour representatives in Liverpool carte blanche. They haven't achieved a single thing in Liverpool ever (please correct me if I'm wrong). They are incompetent and yet continually get re-elected. They have made careers out of convincing people that they will be protected from the ghost of evil Thatcher, without actually promising to do anything positive. That is the problem; a vote for Labour in Liverpool is a very defensive one. But the reality is, no defence is actually needed, and isn't provided anyway.

Under Labour, the city has seen next to no investment in local public transport and has seen its economic base being shifted towards Labour mill town heartland, Manchester. The big advances that have been made in Liverpool have come from private sector investment and European funding.

It's time for a change, but attitudes and voting must change first.

[Tony Sebo]

Originally Posted by TommyMogan

Liverpool under a Tory government? I hope not. Back into the fire if that bunch of southern inbreds get in.

Father O'Mally has been fucking my little brother, but it's better than that old Eton creep eyeing up me maa!

[TommyMogan]

Originally Posted by Splendidineogh

It's time for a change,

It isn't as New Lab have done a great job.change a winning team. Find out out the Tories. What they are, they represent, uphold, who funds them, their track record, etc. Once you know, you have to be demented to vote for them.

[Howie_P]

Tories publish planning green paper
22 Feb 2010, 16:16

Plans to scrap Regional Spatial Strategies and 'all levels of unelected regional government' were confirmed by the Conservative Party today.

Published on the party's website this afternoon, the policy document, entitled Open Source Planning, has far-reaching implications for developers and planners. Housing targets will be scrapped, there will be a new third party right to appeal and the future of regional development agencies looks more doubtful than ever, although they were not mentioned by name.

David Cameron, Conservative party leader, said on the site: "Whitehall targets and unelected quangos will be scrapped, to be replaced with a democratic system for national infrastructure and incentives to promote local homes and jobs."

In response, Liz Peace, chief executive of the British Property Federation, which represents commercial and residential developers and investors, said: "House building is at its lowest level for generations and we need to kick-start construction without delay. Targets have failed and it's clear we need to try out new innovative ways of making things happen but while there are some excellent ideas here, third party right of appeals would be a recipe for chaos. It would clog up the system and undermine everything the Tories have said about being pro-development.

"Local incentives are sensible if the sums are large enough to sway people and few will mourn the death of the Community Infrastructure Levy, although we suspect a tariff may be rather similar in practice. We also welcome the commitment to take forward plans to simplify the planning system as advised in the Killian Pretty Review. While it is vital that locals have a say in development it is essential that this does not simply recreate the current Whitehall-level bureaucracy at local level and so we welcome Grant Shapps' assurances over being 'pro-development'. The key to making any new proposals work will be an ongoing, direct conversation with the industry to ensure that what looks good to voters is truly workable in the real, post-election world."

■ The paper can be download in full at the Conservative party website

Source: Place North West

[WatcherZero]

If you remove regional planning agencies then how do you get joined up thinking across county or Borough borders? Who identifies what local transport needs are and campaigns for the strategic transport infrastructure?

Are we back to Whitehall planning everything in this country?

[Howie_P]

London to escape controversial Conservative cull of council planning powers which will throw Liverpool and Merseyside projects into chaos
Feb 23 2010
by Rob Merrick, Liverpool Daily Post

LONDON will escape a controversial Tory cull which will throw key infrastructure projects in Merseyside into chaos, it was revealed yesterday.

The capital alone will retain key cross-council powers for housing, transport and business investment when similar strategies are scrapped everywhere else in England.

Last night, a leading academic warned: “This means a two-tier structure, where Boris Johnson keeps his plan for London, but it is scrapped everywhere else.”

The Daily Post revealed last week the Conservatives will use executive powers to axe regional spatial strategies (RSS) within weeks of a general election victory.

Labour immediately warned that key projects to build bridges, roads and rail links and expand ports and airports would “grind to a halt” if the strategies were ripped up.

Phil Woolas, the “minister for the North West”, claimed the £431m second Mersey crossing, the Liverpool-Manchester rail electrification and expansion plans at the Port of Liverpool and John Lennon Airport were all under threat.

Now the Tories’ planning green paper has revealed that London, because of its elected mayor and assembly, will retain its “regional planning architecture”.

It follows similar Conservative plans to keep the London Development Agency, while scrapping the Northwest Development Agency, although business spokesman Ken Clarke has now ordered a rethink.

Yesterday, Caroline Spelman, the Tory communities spokeswoman, refused repeated requests to speak to the Daily Post, despite issuing a press release arguing the shake-up would “put local communities in the driving seat”.

But Professor Alan Townsend, formerly chairman of regeneration at Durham University, said: “It seems London’s planning will be kept in working order.”

Continues >>

[Babaloo]

'London' is a clearly defined area that functions as such.

Englandsnorthwest is a the whole of the west side of England north of Wales!

In effect the Liverpool city region will be similar to what is being proposed for London. This makes much more sense than the current NWDA set up.