Opposition to 1,650 homes (From Swindon Advertiser)

ahhhh here we go!! Nimbys whining and harping on about sustainability etc Just be honest and say your worried about how it will effect your area and property prices! Urban settlements grow... fact and they have to grow somewhere...

But this is now getting out of hand.

Let's get the Front Garden finished first (over 4,000 houses with planning permission) and the Northern Development (still another 589 houses with planning permission) before targetting anywhere else. The Council has spent a fortune laying the infrastructure for the Front Garden but the houses aren't being built. Mad or what to then target more land for housing and businesses at Coate (890 houses), Tadpole Farm (1,695 houses) and then Kingsdown/Blunsdon (1,650 houses) and east Swindon (over 8,000 houses). Then there's the houses with planning permission in Wiltshire at West Swindon to add in. What a mess!

Swindon planners reckon that an average of about 1500 houses will be built each year until 2026. At the moment the figure is more like 800. New houses are not being taken up.

Empty offices, jobs going right left and centre... and yet over 100 hectares of new countryside bing earmarked as employment land.

Utter madness.

Next time you drive down Broadbush have a look out for all the extra houses people have built in their gardens. Having looked at the plans the site is some way off from Broadbush homes and doesn't stop at Kingsdown Lane but goes round to the A419.

I'm in agreement with Felix here, the continued urban sprawl is not properly managed and infrastructure not properly thought out.

Lets get some of the existing development completed first. Even areas of Red House/Priory Vale haven't been completed yet which have been in development some 10 years.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that the Councillors are deliberately trying to make Swindon much bigger than is currently sustainable simply to boost their own ego's.

In recent weeks some 1500 people have been earmarked for redundancy and their are complaints that there are a lack of jobs in the area.

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
I'm in agreement with Felix here, the continued urban sprawl is not properly managed and infrastructure not properly thought out.

Lets get some of the existing development completed first. Even areas of Red House/Priory Vale haven't been completed yet which have been in development some 10 years.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that the Councillors are deliberately trying to make Swindon much bigger than is currently sustainable simply to boost their own ego's.

In recent weeks some 1500 people have been earmarked for redundancy and their are complaints that there are a lack of jobs in the area.

Problem is this doesn't take into acount the shortage of housing in the UK. The issue if jobs is irrelevant and nothing but a smoke screen

@adsinibiza

How can the issue of jobs be irrelevant?

If there is a shortage of housing and a lack of sustainable employment then it has to be said the country is over populated..... Unless of course you think its feasible that more and more people live a life of being looked after by the state.

Lord Ash, I agree with you, but if they have no jobs and no money, who else is going to look after them!!!!

Also agree we should surely finish the areas that are currently being developed before we start digging up more and more. And who exactly is buying the houses or are they all social housing now that we can no longer afford. Catch 22.

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
@adsinibiza

How can the issue of jobs be irrelevant?

If there is a shortage of housing and a lack of sustainable employment then it has to be said the country is over populated..... Unless of course you think its feasible that more and more people live a life of being looked after by the state.

For example the 1.6 million 20-40 year olds living with their parents due to a lack of housing and the fact that housing costs too much which is mainly due to a lack of supply. Employment status has nothing to do with it at all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-19936477

It ihas been widely recognised for some time that there is a shortage of around 2 million homes in the UK - much of it down to the last Government short-sighted immigration policy.

@adsinibiza

Cross reference that number with the unemployed; factor in the effects of uncontrolled immigration, consider all the houses that lay empty, then there are those that chose to do so due to parental care needs and that number becomes a little different does it not.

The assumption is that most of those living at home do so because because they cannot afford somewhere else even though they are working.

What is the actual number for Swindon to justify Swindon specifically requiring that many houses.

Houses need to be built in areas where employment is; I see nothing coming to Swindon that will alleviate the existing unemployment let alone help sustain another 10,000 houses.

Swindon's existing employment rate is going to take a big hit with 1500 more being added to the unemployed list.

@LordAshOfTheBrake you're only looking at today, whereas these housing plans need to look ten to 15 years into the future. These things have to be done on a continuous basis, otherwise you end up with what we have in the town centre.

Yes, it's crystal ball gazing, but I'm sure people said there is no way that Swindon could support all the homes being built in north Swindon, but those houses have been comforatbly filled.

There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

StillPav - unfortunately for Swindon, many of the houses built in North Swindon are comfortably filled with commuters who work somewhere else.

A lack of local jobs is a massive issue, I can't see why anyone would deny this. I also see nothing planned for upgrading the A419 for all these extra vehicles that will be using the roads to travel to other towns. If they are really needed, why not build these houses in the areas where the jobs are? That's certainly not Swindon.

I see nothing that indicates Swindon will become a more popular destination for work in the medium term.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man - I agree that a lot of people who live in Swindon work elsewhere, but likewise, I work in Swindon and at least half my colleagues commute from places like Bath, Bristol, Cheltenham, Gloucester and even as far as west London and Newport. I think that is nature of the modern workplace, people change jobs regularly and therefore are prepared to commute, rather than move.

As for jobs in Swindon, I agree, the short to medium term looks dire. However, the jobs/skilled workers situation is chicken and egg, if we don’t build homes in Swindon where people want to live we’ll never attract skilled employees and in turn we’ll never attract quality employers.

@StillPav

Not looking at today at all. What is the net job creation over the last 10 years in and around Swindon. Does it outpace the rate of housing development.

If the infrastructure and jobs were available; then personally I wouldn't have a problem, but as we already see the infrastructure is neglected (school place shortages in North Swindon and main road capacity are two obvious ones and still no firm plans to address either)


@ABC

So you think it is acceptable to build houses where there is a lack of employment. How do you think these people are going to afford to live; off the state!

You talk about recession and a lack of jobs being endemic; well I think its going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Until fiscal responsibility (personally, locally, nationally and internationally) becomes the norm this crisis will continue.

Quote "It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life."

I don't think anyone said anything about the right to live or the chance of a decent life. Of course people should have that opportunity; however it should be because they work for it and not claim off the state; which yet again brings us back to jobs and a lack of.

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

@StillPav

Quote "As for jobs in Swindon, I agree, the short to medium term looks dire. However, the jobs/skilled workers situation is chicken and egg, if we don’t build homes in Swindon where people want to live we’ll never attract skilled employees and in turn we’ll never attract quality employers."

Unfortunately the last 10 years has shown the eggs are here, but the chickens haven't been coming. How many major employers have come to Swindon in the last 10/15 years of the current major building programme.

@ABC

The housing economy won't work like that. Governments (all flavours) have a vested interest in preventing house prices from falling.

The best that will happen is another 5 - 10 years of near static prices thus allowing inflation to reduce house prices relative to other costs, earnings etc.

In addition to that banks need to get their houses in order and large scale mortgage lending won't come back until all the current scandals are out in the open and under control. Regulation changes mean they need to stockpile assets and cash.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.

Prices will not be "more affordable" and drop while existing owners cannot afford to sell. Lots of people are simply not selling because to do so would put them in debt with no assets (negative equity). Until this situation resolves itself, sales volumes of older houses will be limited at best. The only way this will be resolved is through banks offering mortgages and loans at sensible rates so that people can pay off their debts quicker.

LordAshOfTheBrake – I have no idea what the net (or other) job creation is in Swindon, but you cannot deny that thousands of homes have been built in the last 10 years in Swindon and the very few of them are sitting empty. Now I appreciate that homes in Swindon are very cheap compared to surrounding areas, so this may well be attracting commuters, but as I said above, I think this is the nature of the modern workplace.

I would be very interested to know the number (rather than percentage) of jobs in Swindon over the last ten years, if anyone has figures.

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man – “No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.”

Where are these houses though? I read an article recently where empty homes were being sold for as little as £50. The problem was that they were on a terrible estate in an area where there are very few jobs. Nobody wants to live in these areas, which explains why the hoses are empty in the first place.

StillPav wrote:
The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man – “No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.”

Where are these houses though? I read an article recently where empty homes were being sold for as little as £50. The problem was that they were on a terrible estate in an area where there are very few jobs. Nobody wants to live in these areas, which explains why the hoses are empty in the first place.

Sounds like the perfect opportunity to knock these houses down and regenerate the area, bringing jobs and modern housing to the areas in question!

@The Artist.....

That was tried in some of those areas, but when the money ran out the development came to an end.

This was exasperated by the lack of employment opportunity in those areas.

@StillPav

Its not whether the houses are empty or not; its whether the households are self sustaining. Houses can always be filled.

If fuel prices continue to rise, then people will start to move closer to their employment; maybe that will balance things out.

I seem to recall that in Red House a couple of years ago; houses couldn't be sold, so they were bought at a discount by housing associations; angering quite a few residence at the time.

As I've already stated, if the employment concerns and infrastructure are addressed, I don't have a problem with Swindon expanding, but it cannot keep expanding without addressing those issues.

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.

Prices will not be "more affordable" and drop while existing owners cannot afford to sell. Lots of people are simply not selling because to do so would put them in debt with no assets (negative equity). Until this situation resolves itself, sales volumes of older houses will be limited at best. The only way this will be resolved is through banks offering mortgages and loans at sensible rates so that people can pay off their debts quicker.

Figures extracted from the Royal Institute of British Architects and not disputed by the Government.
The fact is that we have such a housing shortage that it has become a housing crisis.
Yes we could use the empty houses before building new ones, but the old stock may not meet modern standards/demand, and it might not be cost effective to "modernize" them, they may also not be in the correct location where the demand is or will be.
The population is growing, we live longer, and family size is changing.
It is natural for people to oppose and fear change(s) but we simply cannot stop it, schools will be built, houses will be built, wind Turbines will be built and so on.....NIMBYS are only delaying the inevitable and damaging Growth.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.

Prices will not be "more affordable" and drop while existing owners cannot afford to sell. Lots of people are simply not selling because to do so would put them in debt with no assets (negative equity). Until this situation resolves itself, sales volumes of older houses will be limited at best. The only way this will be resolved is through banks offering mortgages and loans at sensible rates so that people can pay off their debts quicker.

Figures extracted from the Royal Institute of British Architects and not disputed by the Government.
The fact is that we have such a housing shortage that it has become a housing crisis.
Yes we could use the empty houses before building new ones, but the old stock may not meet modern standards/demand, and it might not be cost effective to "modernize" them, they may also not be in the correct location where the demand is or will be.
The population is growing, we live longer, and family size is changing.
It is natural for people to oppose and fear change(s) but we simply cannot stop it, schools will be built, houses will be built, wind Turbines will be built and so on.....NIMBYS are only delaying the inevitable and damaging Growth.

Nope, what is damaging growth is successive governments failing to invest in infrastructure. We need big investment in road, rail, utilities, jobs to support this building.

@ABC...

Try telling the oversubscribed schools in North Swindon that the issue is soon to be alleviated; whilst the council sit can't even find a site for addressing the schooling issue.

The North Swindon development has been ongoing for about 15 years. You'd have thought that was plenty of time for forward planning of facilities like schools.

Red House still doesn't have its pub that was part of the development planning some 7+ years ago.

Address the infrastructure and jobs then fine keep building.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.

Prices will not be "more affordable" and drop while existing owners cannot afford to sell. Lots of people are simply not selling because to do so would put them in debt with no assets (negative equity). Until this situation resolves itself, sales volumes of older houses will be limited at best. The only way this will be resolved is through banks offering mortgages and loans at sensible rates so that people can pay off their debts quicker.

Figures extracted from the Royal Institute of British Architects and not disputed by the Government.
The fact is that we have such a housing shortage that it has become a housing crisis.
Yes we could use the empty houses before building new ones, but the old stock may not meet modern standards/demand, and it might not be cost effective to "modernize" them, they may also not be in the correct location where the demand is or will be.
The population is growing, we live longer, and family size is changing.
It is natural for people to oppose and fear change(s) but we simply cannot stop it, schools will be built, houses will be built, wind Turbines will be built and so on.....NIMBYS are only delaying the inevitable and damaging Growth.

The immigrant population is growing.
The immigrant family size is growing.
That's where the problem lies - immigrants.
Send all illegal immigrants, whether EU members or not, back to where they came from and stop ALL benefits to legal immigrants until they have paid into our welfare system for at least 5 years.
The uncontrolled immigarnt fiasco in this country must be stopped - by force if necessary.

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
@ABC...

Try telling the oversubscribed schools in North Swindon that the issue is soon to be alleviated; whilst the council sit can't even find a site for addressing the schooling issue.

The North Swindon development has been ongoing for about 15 years. You'd have thought that was plenty of time for forward planning of facilities like schools.

Red House still doesn't have its pub that was part of the development planning some 7+ years ago.

Address the infrastructure and jobs then fine keep building.

People do what they want: divorce, marry, move jobs, have kids etc...they won't wait until a road or motorway or schools, houses are built.
There is an urgent need for housing, to meet demand, but also to boost the Economy and jobs.

Always Grumpy wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.

Prices will not be "more affordable" and drop while existing owners cannot afford to sell. Lots of people are simply not selling because to do so would put them in debt with no assets (negative equity). Until this situation resolves itself, sales volumes of older houses will be limited at best. The only way this will be resolved is through banks offering mortgages and loans at sensible rates so that people can pay off their debts quicker.

Figures extracted from the Royal Institute of British Architects and not disputed by the Government.
The fact is that we have such a housing shortage that it has become a housing crisis.
Yes we could use the empty houses before building new ones, but the old stock may not meet modern standards/demand, and it might not be cost effective to "modernize" them, they may also not be in the correct location where the demand is or will be.
The population is growing, we live longer, and family size is changing.
It is natural for people to oppose and fear change(s) but we simply cannot stop it, schools will be built, houses will be built, wind Turbines will be built and so on.....NIMBYS are only delaying the inevitable and damaging Growth.

The immigrant population is growing.
The immigrant family size is growing.
That's where the problem lies - immigrants.
Send all illegal immigrants, whether EU members or not, back to where they came from and stop ALL benefits to legal immigrants until they have paid into our welfare system for at least 5 years.
The uncontrolled immigarnt fiasco in this country must be stopped - by force if necessary.

Are you wearing a black uniform?

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
There is massive housing shortage, in fact the biggest since World War II.
Our Economy is yet again in Recession, and unemployment is endemic.
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.
We are all equals and I find it so selfish, so narrow minded that people object to such building plans.

The "housing shortage" is a smokescreen for a range of wider social issues. Young people do not seem to want to live with anyone else, less people are getting married for example.

There are houses empty, there are houses that have been on the market for ages. The only reason there are not more houses on the market is because of mortgage availability and the stand-off between buyers and sellers over price.

Others may mention the other smokescreen that is the housing waiting list. Being on the housing waiting list does not mean homeless. What we need to do is improve mobility of the housing market. This again comes down to mortgage availability...

This country needs 300,000 new houses/year.....you talk of mortgage availability and price war.....well maybe if we were building enough houses, prices would be more affordable and mortgages would be available.....

No it doesn't - there's currently over a million houses standing empty. That's over 3 years supply even at your inflated figures.

Prices will not be "more affordable" and drop while existing owners cannot afford to sell. Lots of people are simply not selling because to do so would put them in debt with no assets (negative equity). Until this situation resolves itself, sales volumes of older houses will be limited at best. The only way this will be resolved is through banks offering mortgages and loans at sensible rates so that people can pay off their debts quicker.

Figures extracted from the Royal Institute of British Architects and not disputed by the Government.
The fact is that we have such a housing shortage that it has become a housing crisis.
Yes we could use the empty houses before building new ones, but the old stock may not meet modern standards/demand, and it might not be cost effective to "modernize" them, they may also not be in the correct location where the demand is or will be.
The population is growing, we live longer, and family size is changing.
It is natural for people to oppose and fear change(s) but we simply cannot stop it, schools will be built, houses will be built, wind Turbines will be built and so on.....NIMBYS are only delaying the inevitable and damaging Growth.

The immigrant population is growing.
The immigrant family size is growing.
That's where the problem lies - immigrants.
Send all illegal immigrants, whether EU members or not, back to where they came from and stop ALL benefits to legal immigrants until they have paid into our welfare system for at least 5 years.
The uncontrolled immigarnt fiasco in this country must be stopped - by force if necessary.

Are you wearing a black uniform?

How offensive.

Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

house on the hill wrote:
Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

Hardly ethnic cleansing - you quite clearly do not understand what that means.
I do not want illegal immigrants in my country at my expense. This country cannot and should not support them.
I do not want 'legal' immigrants in this country relying on our over generous benefits system. They are the ones flocking here from EU countries, not working and living off our benefits. You think it's bad now - just wait until the Bulgarians and Romanians flood in. They have no intention of working, will collect their benefits and live off the proceeds of crime, rather like the illegal Romanians here at the moment.
As to using force to get rid of them, that means removing them even against their will and not allowing them almost unlimited free legal means in an effort to remain here.
Yes, your understanding of ethnic cleansing is somewhat lacking, which I find quite sad that someone should display such a level of ignorance.

Always Grumpy wrote:

house on the hill wrote:
Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

Hardly ethnic cleansing - you quite clearly do not understand what that means.
I do not want illegal immigrants in my country at my expense. This country cannot and should not support them.
I do not want 'legal' immigrants in this country relying on our over generous benefits system. They are the ones flocking here from EU countries, not working and living off our benefits. You think it's bad now - just wait until the Bulgarians and Romanians flood in. They have no intention of working, will collect their benefits and live off the proceeds of crime, rather like the illegal Romanians here at the moment.
As to using force to get rid of them, that means removing them even against their will and not allowing them almost unlimited free legal means in an effort to remain here.
Yes, your understanding of ethnic cleansing is somewhat lacking, which I find quite sad that someone should display such a level of ignorance.

You are perfectly entitled to express your xenophobic views but I think you need to educate yourself a little better.....
5 million Britons live abroad (5 million British immigrants), making Britain the 8th biggest immigration source in the world.
Number of immigrants number/country puts the UK 9th in the world (USA=1st / Germany = 3rd / France = 5th) and in terms of % of the population, puts the UK 15th in the world.
So, the UK has less immigrants than the USA, France or Germany,yet these Economies perform better than us "despite" having more and larger immigrants population than UK.
Any ideas?

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

house on the hill wrote:
Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

Hardly ethnic cleansing - you quite clearly do not understand what that means.
I do not want illegal immigrants in my country at my expense. This country cannot and should not support them.
I do not want 'legal' immigrants in this country relying on our over generous benefits system. They are the ones flocking here from EU countries, not working and living off our benefits. You think it's bad now - just wait until the Bulgarians and Romanians flood in. They have no intention of working, will collect their benefits and live off the proceeds of crime, rather like the illegal Romanians here at the moment.
As to using force to get rid of them, that means removing them even against their will and not allowing them almost unlimited free legal means in an effort to remain here.
Yes, your understanding of ethnic cleansing is somewhat lacking, which I find quite sad that someone should display such a level of ignorance.

You are perfectly entitled to express your xenophobic views but I think you need to educate yourself a little better.....
5 million Britons live abroad (5 million British immigrants), making Britain the 8th biggest immigration source in the world.
Number of immigrants number/country puts the UK 9th in the world (USA=1st / Germany = 3rd / France = 5th) and in terms of % of the population, puts the UK 15th in the world.
So, the UK has less immigrants than the USA, France or Germany,yet these Economies perform better than us "despite" having more and larger immigrants population than UK.
Any ideas?

I certainly wouldn't accept the likes of someone such as you trying to 'educate' me. On the contrary, it's you that needs educating. Your ignorance in so many posts clearly indicate that.
British immigrants abroad don't go there to be unemployed or live off the benefits of other countries, unlike all the scroungers flocking into this country.
By the way, with reference to your earlier, quite offensive post, my uniform was British Army khaki. Have you got a problem with that as well?

Always Grumpy wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

house on the hill wrote:
Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

Hardly ethnic cleansing - you quite clearly do not understand what that means.
I do not want illegal immigrants in my country at my expense. This country cannot and should not support them.
I do not want 'legal' immigrants in this country relying on our over generous benefits system. They are the ones flocking here from EU countries, not working and living off our benefits. You think it's bad now - just wait until the Bulgarians and Romanians flood in. They have no intention of working, will collect their benefits and live off the proceeds of crime, rather like the illegal Romanians here at the moment.
As to using force to get rid of them, that means removing them even against their will and not allowing them almost unlimited free legal means in an effort to remain here.
Yes, your understanding of ethnic cleansing is somewhat lacking, which I find quite sad that someone should display such a level of ignorance.

You are perfectly entitled to express your xenophobic views but I think you need to educate yourself a little better.....
5 million Britons live abroad (5 million British immigrants), making Britain the 8th biggest immigration source in the world.
Number of immigrants number/country puts the UK 9th in the world (USA=1st / Germany = 3rd / France = 5th) and in terms of % of the population, puts the UK 15th in the world.
So, the UK has less immigrants than the USA, France or Germany,yet these Economies perform better than us "despite" having more and larger immigrants population than UK.
Any ideas?

I certainly wouldn't accept the likes of someone such as you trying to 'educate' me. On the contrary, it's you that needs educating. Your ignorance in so many posts clearly indicate that.
British immigrants abroad don't go there to be unemployed or live off the benefits of other countries, unlike all the scroungers flocking into this country.
By the way, with reference to your earlier, quite offensive post, my uniform was British Army khaki. Have you got a problem with that as well?

Well I am sorry I wouldn't want to educate you by force, if that is what you mean LOL
"British immigrants do not abroad to be unemployed", ok well we are making progress.... does it mean that every single British immigrant works? or do you mean that all non British immigrants do not work, which is it please?

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

house on the hill wrote:
Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

Hardly ethnic cleansing - you quite clearly do not understand what that means.
I do not want illegal immigrants in my country at my expense. This country cannot and should not support them.
I do not want 'legal' immigrants in this country relying on our over generous benefits system. They are the ones flocking here from EU countries, not working and living off our benefits. You think it's bad now - just wait until the Bulgarians and Romanians flood in. They have no intention of working, will collect their benefits and live off the proceeds of crime, rather like the illegal Romanians here at the moment.
As to using force to get rid of them, that means removing them even against their will and not allowing them almost unlimited free legal means in an effort to remain here.
Yes, your understanding of ethnic cleansing is somewhat lacking, which I find quite sad that someone should display such a level of ignorance.

You are perfectly entitled to express your xenophobic views but I think you need to educate yourself a little better.....
5 million Britons live abroad (5 million British immigrants), making Britain the 8th biggest immigration source in the world.
Number of immigrants number/country puts the UK 9th in the world (USA=1st / Germany = 3rd / France = 5th) and in terms of % of the population, puts the UK 15th in the world.
So, the UK has less immigrants than the USA, France or Germany,yet these Economies perform better than us "despite" having more and larger immigrants population than UK.
Any ideas?

I certainly wouldn't accept the likes of someone such as you trying to 'educate' me. On the contrary, it's you that needs educating. Your ignorance in so many posts clearly indicate that.
British immigrants abroad don't go there to be unemployed or live off the benefits of other countries, unlike all the scroungers flocking into this country.
By the way, with reference to your earlier, quite offensive post, my uniform was British Army khaki. Have you got a problem with that as well?

Well I am sorry I wouldn't want to educate you by force, if that is what you mean LOL
"British immigrants do not abroad to be unemployed", ok well we are making progress.... does it mean that every single British immigrant works? or do you mean that all non British immigrants do not work, which is it please?

Put it this way, I haven't read any reports of British people hanging to the underside of lorries in an effort to get into other countries. British immigrants tend to go legally through the front door with either jobs to go to or as retirees with an independent income. That's quite different to all the illegal immigrants trying to get into this country. If they were legal and had jobs to go to they wouldn't strap themselves to the underside of lorries or hide in the back of them or pay someone to smuggle them in.
We then have all the immigrants who get into this country because of the disasterous position this country has found itself in as a result of being a member of the EU.
You won't see the funny side when all the Eastern Europeans flock here at the end of the year LOL

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.

Well, that's where you're wrong. It is entirely up to the people of the UK whether they wish to allow the country to be dragged to third-world status or not.

The EU Referendum will give people that choice.

You are a supporter of immigration because you are an immigrant. Of course you're unlikely to see the issue for what it really is. You, like millions upon millions of others, have desserted your home countries and come here to take advantage of the economic milk and honey. I don't blame you, not at all. I, like many others, blame our politicians and our system.

History proves that Blair, Brown and Labour have all but destroyed this country... and for what? A cynical, snide and truculent ideology. Sure, you and your family benefitted, but try to the remember the millions of British families who have lost out in order to provide your gain.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
So, the UK has less immigrants than the USA, France or Germany,yet these Economies perform better than us "despite" having more and larger immigrants population than UK.
Any ideas?

Untrue, I'm afraid.

Percentage of the population of that are immigrants:

France: 8.5%

Germany: 9%

USA: 12.5% (the overwhelming majority of which are Mexicans, a country with which the US shares a 2000 mile long border)

UK: 12.5% (we are an island and thus share no borders)

Also, as I'm sure you're aware, the US doesn't have a welfare state of anything close to the 'generosity' of ours.

The reasons for the state of the UK economy are well known and very clear. Just because you don't like those reasons doesn't mean you should make up your 'facts'.

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
It is not up to you or me to decide who has the right to live and work and have a chance to have a decent life.

Well, that's where you're wrong. It is entirely up to the people of the UK whether they wish to allow the country to be dragged to third-world status or not.

The EU Referendum will give people that choice.

You are a supporter of immigration because you are an immigrant. Of course you're unlikely to see the issue for what it really is. You, like millions upon millions of others, have desserted your home countries and come here to take advantage of the economic milk and honey. I don't blame you, not at all. I, like many others, blame our politicians and our system.

History proves that Blair, Brown and Labour have all but destroyed this country... and for what? A cynical, snide and truculent ideology. Sure, you and your family benefitted, but try to the remember the millions of British families who have lost out in order to provide your gain.

I guess there is little point discussing this issue with a BNP member.....

Always Grumpy wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Always Grumpy wrote:

house on the hill wrote:
Yes your comment was very offensive. I agree we cannot continue to sustain the influx we have seen and will continue to see in increasing numbers later this year but your idea of "ethnic cleansing" by another name is disgraceful.
We need to control it better from now, but we cant just uproot some who have been here for a while and how far back were you thinking of going????

Hardly ethnic cleansing - you quite clearly do not understand what that means.
I do not want illegal immigrants in my country at my expense. This country cannot and should not support them.
I do not want 'legal' immigrants in this country relying on our over generous benefits system. They are the ones flocking here from EU countries, not working and living off our benefits. You think it's bad now - just wait until the Bulgarians and Romanians flood in. They have no intention of working, will collect their benefits and live off the proceeds of crime, rather like the illegal Romanians here at the moment.
As to using force to get rid of them, that means removing them even against their will and not allowing them almost unlimited free legal means in an effort to remain here.
Yes, your understanding of ethnic cleansing is somewhat lacking, which I find quite sad that someone should display such a level of ignorance.

You are perfectly entitled to express your xenophobic views but I think you need to educate yourself a little better.....
5 million Britons live abroad (5 million British immigrants), making Britain the 8th biggest immigration source in the world.
Number of immigrants number/country puts the UK 9th in the world (USA=1st / Germany = 3rd / France = 5th) and in terms of % of the population, puts the UK 15th in the world.
So, the UK has less immigrants than the USA, France or Germany,yet these Economies perform better than us "despite" having more and larger immigrants population than UK.
Any ideas?

I certainly wouldn't accept the likes of someone such as you trying to 'educate' me. On the contrary, it's you that needs educating. Your ignorance in so many posts clearly indicate that.
British immigrants abroad don't go there to be unemployed or live off the benefits of other countries, unlike all the scroungers flocking into this country.
By the way, with reference to your earlier, quite offensive post, my uniform was British Army khaki. Have you got a problem with that as well?

Well I am sorry I wouldn't want to educate you by force, if that is what you mean LOL
"British immigrants do not abroad to be unemployed", ok well we are making progress.... does it mean that every single British immigrant works? or do you mean that all non British immigrants do not work, which is it please?

Put it this way, I haven't read any reports of British people hanging to the underside of lorries in an effort to get into other countries. British immigrants tend to go legally through the front door with either jobs to go to or as retirees with an independent income. That's quite different to all the illegal immigrants trying to get into this country. If they were legal and had jobs to go to they wouldn't strap themselves to the underside of lorries or hide in the back of them or pay someone to smuggle them in.
We then have all the immigrants who get into this country because of the disasterous position this country has found itself in as a result of being a member of the EU.
You won't see the funny side when all the Eastern Europeans flock here at the end of the year LOL

British immigrants are no better or worse than others, they contribute, they overstay and they commit crimes
A vast number of British immigrants are retirees, living abroad (EU mainly) and have their healthcare provided by the EU country in which they live.....
Illegal immigration is a British issue, Britain is not part of the Schengen Zone so Britain has kept border controls, this has nothing to do with the EU.
I am sorry but I do not believe we will experience mass immigration from Romania and Bulgaria, I have many colleagues there and not one has yet manifested any interest in coming here.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
I guess there is little point discussing this issue with a BNP member.....

Oh dear. You've had the facts presented to you, realised you've lost the argument and, again, come up with fictitious LIES in an attempt to close down the debate.

What a disgraceful post. I had thought you were slightly better than that, but it seems you've proved many stereotypes to be sadly true in your case.

I am sorry but I do not believe we will experience mass immigration from Romania and Bulgaria, I have many colleagues there and not one has yet manifested any interest in coming here.

Again, you seem to have missed the point entirely.

Nobody is expecting well paid people, with decent jobs, to emigrate to Britain once the doors are open.

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
I guess there is little point discussing this issue with a BNP member.....

Oh dear. You've had the facts presented to you, realised you've lost the argument and, again, come up with fictitious LIES in an attempt to close down the debate.

What a disgraceful post. I had thought you were slightly better than that, but it seems you've proved many stereotypes to be sadly true in your case.

Stereotyping can go both ways....

For more information about the proposed development please 'Like' The Blunsdon Action group Facebook page.

We would be interested to hear from LordAshOfTheBrake and FelixA

Hear more comments about the Local Plan 2026 and in particular Area NC5 Kingsdown on BBC Wiltshire Radio over the next few days.