| |
SALFORD STAR CLOSURE – PLANNING SCANDALS AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS
|
|
Star date: 12th May 2021 FROM PLANNING SCANDALS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS The Salford Star began 15 years ago with the voices of the community fighting against the demolition of their affordable houses and the imposition of unaffordable housing in its place. During this period the Star has uncovered planning scandals aplenty which we believe have led to the current affordable housing crisis in the city. Here we document just a few of the many dozens of articles we have published on the issue. Full details here...
|
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.JPG)
(2).JPG)
(1).JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
click image to enlarge
|
Back in 2005, members of the community asked us to create the Salford Star because Salford City Council, in league with the Labour Government of the day and various Government off-shoot organisations like New Deal for Communities, were intent, they said, on clearing thousands of decent affordable houses and replacing them with mostly unaffordable housing. Every single print issue of the Salford Star, which launched in May 2006, had statistics and quotes backing this up. In print issue 2 we had dayglow panels screaming that the price of an affordable house in Weaste and Seedley, based on local incomes, would be £42,000. The average price of the Urban Splash upside down houses was £120,000. Only 12 local people bought one of the 108 houses in the first phase. Yet over £15million of public money had been ploughed into the development. The same story was happening all over 'old' or Central Salford – in the £53million NDC New Deal for Communities area, the community was told that it was "unsustainable", and, while houses were being tinned up on the Whit Lane estate and off Littleton Road, the only new houses that were going up were on the site of the old Kersal High School. Here, at the time, out of 230 new homes that were to be built only five were for truly affordable social rent. It took only until print issue 4, in 2007, to print The Great Affordable Housing Scandal article, with proof of this 'social cleansing' – out of 8,933 housing units for which companies had applied for planning permission (between September 2006 and March 2007), only 175 were to be affordable. Which was 2% of the total. When Salford Council's own policy stated that all new developments should provide between 20% to 25% affordable housing. And so it went on and on and on...planning scandal after planning scandal as few truly affordable houses were demanded in contributions from developers. Affordable housing in Langworthy, Seedley, Charlestown, Lower Kersal, Higher and Lower Broughton was being bulldozed to be replaced by mostly unaffordable housing. We even had what we considered to be proof of social cleansing from these areas... In Higher Broughton, pre-regeneration, there were around four hundred affordable terraced houses. Post-regeneration there were 25 'affordable' houses left, with new houses costing up to £240,000 in the re-named Kings Square development. Before the 'regeneration' of Lower Broughton, 100% of houses were classed as affordable. Near the end of the 'regeneration', only 26% were classed as 'affordable', as 64% of the new houses were for market sale or rent. Lower Broughton developer, Countryside Properties, stated on its relationship with Salford Council that "It was a key aspiration of the Development Agreement to significantly reduce the proportion of affordable housing"... And in Pendleton, 885 affordable properties were down for demolition, to be replaced originally with only five hundred affordable homes, out of 1,500 to be built. The Salford Council business case to the Government on the scheme noted that its Pendleton Together plans "will lead to a dilution in the current concentration of economically inactive households" by "young professionals and individuals who wish to live in Pendleton". 'Dilution' seems to have been on the agenda of all of the regeneration during the lifespan of the Salford Star. In that 2007 print issue we wrote that "Salford Council's whole strategy for affordable housing to date is screaming 'Failure'..." And 15 years on from these social horrors Salford Council is now screaming itself about an 'affordable housing crisis'. It's all been further exacerbated by the transfer of Salford Council's social housing stock to City West (ForViva) and Salix Homes which quickly created profit making subsidiaries. In 2015, the Salford Star managed to put out another print issue (10) after six years of being online, and exposed further planning scandals, in which developers had avoided paying £19million in planning fees and the provision of 800 affordable houses in just the twelve months that were researched. A year later, we re-visited the scandal and wrote that "based on official Salford City Council figures, developers have evaded over £42million in planning fees and obligations over the last two years, while failing to provide over 1,000 affordable houses. As the city's schools are bursting, developers have contributed just £17,000 to funding extra places..." The Council blamed Government policy but that was only part of the story. It was its own inept policies of planning and area values that had cost the city so much.
In 2018, Dr Jonathan Silver at Sheffield University echoed Salford Star research that developers were avoiding millions of pounds in planning fees, while the city was losing thousands of affordable properties. This research looked at just 26 sites in the city that had planning permission (and checked Salford Star data), and concluded that over £18million had been avoided in Section 106 payments plus the provision of over 2,000 affordable properties. Now, the Council has set up its own housing company, Derive, to build a fraction of what developers should have been providing, at a huge cost to the city. The Council finally admitted its mistake in 2019 when it changed its planning policy, weeping that "...there has been widespread public concern about the low proportion of affordable homes"... and affirming that "Transparency...is essential to maintaining public confidence in the planning system"... In future, there would be a minimum of 20% affordable housing everywhere (kind of) and the viability assessments that developers use to avoid planning contributions would be made publicly available. To date there's very little evidence of this happening...
For more background information see this previous Salford Star article and follow the links at the end of it... Salford City Council Admits Scandal as it Changes Planning Policy – click here
For a full background on the closure of the Salford Star see previous articles...
Salford Star To Close After 15 Years – click here The Star Is Born – click here Alice's Story: Injustice From South Africa to Salford – click here Salford Stars – Part 1 – click here Salford Stars Part 2 – click here The Battle of Barton Moss – click here Nigel Pivaro Looks Back Over 15 Years of the Star – click here
|
|
|
|
wrote
at 15:39:01 on 21 July 2021 |
|
|
| Did Insider Knowledge actually find anything out or was it all just hot air? |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 08:25:32 on 14 June 2021 |
|
|
| That is not enough said. Either put up or shut up indsider knowledge. |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 18:28:44 on 12 June 2021 |
|
|
| look at the application to the court. Look at the man who made it. Just bear in mind the court action started mid 2010. Its all there to be seen. Enough said. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 11:15:23 on 10 June 2021 |
|
|
| Insider knowledge , why dont you just say which person made the applications you are on about? You could also try asking Mayor Dennett for copies of the documents or even better ask for him to put them out into the open for anyone and everyone to see.
Inside knowledge if not of much use if it remains hidden or if it is only mentioned with a nod and a wink. As the character Josey Wales said in the film "Are you going to pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 21:20:39 on 09 June 2021 |
|
|
| What you have come up with is something I did not know about. It just gets worse. It shows that at some point, experts at the council thought that some refurbishment would help the local community. If you are on talking terms with the Mayor, what you want is the 2 applications that were made to the court to obtain the cpo court orders that concern the top streets. You then want proof of what was said in them was true. Who was the developer? where was the money coming from? where was the planning permission? and why did the project not proceed? Then look at the man who made these statements. Look very careful at him. Mayor Dennett is not going to give you this information. It is all under lock and key never to see the light of day ever. I really hope you do find out about these applications, but I do not think you will. Keep trying and let us know. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 08:20:27 on 09 June 2021 |
|
|
| Insider nowlege and Bob. Ive found a note from the cpo which appears to have the title "TopSteets POE 250906.nm" but a google search brings nothing up. It is from Dylan Vince's statement and mentions
12.7 "I consider that the proposed balance between refurbishment, new build and demolition is appropiate in the context of the current housing market"
12.8........."The retention of additional remodelled and refurbished houses within the modified scheme specifically addresses the aspirations of members of the community"
12.10 "Funding is in place through the Higher Broughton Partnership"
Is that what you need to ask Paul Dennet to show proof of? Was it Dylan Vinces evidence under oath? |
|
|
?
|
bob wrote
at 10:45:53 on 05 June 2021 |
|
|
| I bet our Ray has had his arse well and truly kicked for opening this can of shit for Merry, not because the high command at clown hall like merry, most of them don't, but because this is big shit headed at Labour, very costly shit. In all honesty, I do not think Merry intended things to turn out the way they did. Perhaps he did consider the idea of refurbishment at first. This was done under whats called umbrella schemes in other parts like seedly, and although these schemes were small, they were reasonably successful. At the times these were done, Merry was in charge. As Guy Griffiths points out, the problems started, when the few problem families were moved in by housing associations like they were down Langworthy. Once a few deadlegs move in, more soon follow. Housing associations like to "decant" as they put it, (they talk about these people as though they were expensive old vintage wine), problem people into estates that they don't own. What they do, is enter into long term contract with private landlords, who don't give a shit because the money is guaranteed. Once this happened this would have sealed the fate of the area. Powerful voices would have been bending Merrys ear. Something had to be done ,and it was.Looks like Merry's time has come. Perhaps it's time for Dr "Long Jon" Silver from Sheffield to take another look at this one..AH AHRR me hearties. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 09:30:56 on 04 June 2021 |
|
|
| The council must really fear something. Even though the Salford star has officially closed, still not one of them has come on to comment. Why? If Merry was the one to blame, as Rayofsunshine has said, then you would have thought one of his enemies in the party would have come on and settled a few old scores? Maybe this goes further and others would be dragged down as well? Im surprised other journalists havent been all over this as it would be a good story. |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 15:32:31 on 02 June 2021 |
|
|
| Nice to hear from you Rayofsunshine. We all know you are a councillor.I am, at this very moment, not alleging anything. I am asking that the council makes these 2 compulsory purchase documents for the top and bottom streets to be made available where we can all see them. I also ask for proof that what was said in them was true. I know that you will not do this. I also know you will not tell us why you are not going to do this. You are right in suggesting a lot of good people lost good homes for nothing. This was all down to the stupid vanity of one arrogant man. It was just a vile waste of everything, let alone the human suffering. The truth is there Rayofsunshine,let us have it out now, let the ones responsible get the blame now and justice for the victims. It is a long time till the next elections, people will have forgot by then. |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 13:56:05 on 02 June 2021 |
|
|
| At least Bob seems to have twigged. I first saw these papers a few years ago. I was shown them on a computer.I do not know if they were scanned in or as you say,taken from council website files. I did try to get someone to find them on the council web, but they could not find them.I cannot ask the council for them because I am not one of the people affected by them, and it might compromise my inside source if I was seen to be asking. I can only repeat what I said before, look and you will find, and look at the man.Forget about the Mayor, and forget about Starmer. When Starmer was in charge of the crown prosecution he did not prosecute one very serious labour wrongdoer who did much worse things. Just look at the hillsborough thing. It took years for all that to come out in the wash.I hope this one does. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:51:58 on 02 June 2021 |
|
|
| Insider Knowledge,what are you actually alledging?
That ļegal documents/statements were false or that
people lòst their hòme for nò gòod reason ? |
|
|
?
|
Bob wrote
at 15:23:11 on 01 June 2021 |
|
|
| I have finally twigged to whats going on here. And if its bad as I think it is,then things are very serious indeed, and some people are in for the high jump. Its been said here that these paperwork concerning the compulsory purchase is not quite right, I am damn sure its not.We need to see it now, and whats more, we need proof that what is said in it is true. when you get official paperwork like this, people just take it for granted it is right. What if its not right? I am pretty sure that something terrible has happened because of this. I feel that it was not only the local residents that were misled about this whole matter. I believe someone else was as well. The only way to find out is to get that paperwork into the light of day, and proof if any, of what was said in it.. On the news yesterday, it was about a wicked ethnic cleansing act in Tulsa America, that happened 100 years ago in 1921. It is only now, that the few people left(all over 100) and the descendants of others ,are going to get compensation for the wrongs committed. The Salford people who suffered here need to be given justice. lets see the papers. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 11:49:03 on 01 June 2021 |
|
|
| Insider knowledge, where did you see the documents? It seems odd that you cannot see them again. Were they ever on the council website and they have been taken down? If it was a copy from one of the people who signed the none disclosure agreement and they will not let you see it again, then that would be intriguing!!
Have you asked the council for copies of the documents? Freedom of information?
Have you asked John Merry if he can supply you with copies? If he cannot then ask why not.
I suspect salford councillors still check up on this site but probably none would admit to it, so why not raise your concerns with John Merry about the statments that were said under oath (who wrote them by the way?) and also send a copy to Paul Dennet and maybe even Keir Starmer.
If there has been any wrong doing, I suspect that they will either ignore the email, hide behing the "not in public interest" defence or maybe panic and lay the blame onto someone. Im sure you could post up what they say one here.
Rayofsunshine has said on here that pathfinder was John Merrys fault, so maybe if there has been any wrongdoing, he is the man they would throw under the bus.
Where is Ray these days? I'd appreciate his take on this |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 14:56:44 on 31 May 2021 |
|
|
| To Wrote at 17-30.If you look at what I write previous article below, I state that I have seen the documents , but that was years ago.I have tried but to no avail to get hold of them again. What I think about what went on does not matter. All I ask for is for these documents to be made available, and for proof of what was said in them. Is this too much to ask for? As I recall, they did say planning permission was given, they said a developer was in place,and they did say funds were available.These statements were made under oath in the form of an affidavit. Do not rely on Rayofsunshine to ask the Mayor to look into things. Just ask to see these documents yourself with your own eyes, copies must exist. When you see them, you will find out that what I say is right. Then you must ask the question,prove these statements are true, and if there was a developer, who was it, where was the due diligence on the finance side, and who applied for the permission. I am told that the people who developed that site did not become involved till 2011. What happened during the years since these compulsory purchase orders were approved? Then of course, you must take a close look at the man who wrote these statements. I reckon it might be a good idea to ask councillor merry if he can help provide you with copies of these orders,and the other info required, after all, he is local, and it is in his council ward. I am sure he will be pleased to meet you as you ask the question. Go on, go have a chat with him,let us know what he says. After all, this whole re development in his patch was his wonderful idea. You ask the question about what the implications are if the council is found to have told lies. Only one answer to that. Enormous. Very enormous. I though ,am not accusing the council of telling lies, I am merely asking them to prove they have been telling the truth. Is that too much to ask? The Salford Star has always been for the truth in Salford. It has helped provoke thought and discussion by Salford citizens about Salford matters.Would it not be a fitting epitaph for the Salford Star to get to the bottom of what went on in this development over the years? |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 17:30:43 on 30 May 2021 |
|
|
| Insider knowledge. I think you should state exactly what you think the council said, via their man, that was untrue. If you have not seen the documents how do you know? Do you think they didnt have the funds in place or that they did not have a developer on board, or do you think it is because they mislead people about renovating a number of houses?
Obviously something stinks with the people in Devonshire st having to sign a non disclosure orders.
Perhaps Rayofsunshine can bring this to the attention of Paul Dennett as the council have always said there should be transparency, and it seems in this case there obviously isnt?
What would the implications be if the council were to be found out to have lied when they applied for the compulsory purchase orders? |
|
|
?
|
Insider Knowledge wrote
at 16:42:11 on 28 May 2021 |
|
|
| To Wrote at 9:03 .I must admit, I also have been unable to source these CPO documents, despite trying. I did see them a couple of years ago,and I know who wrote them. There are two documents,one for the top streets, and one for the bottom ones. Mr Griffiths said he had a collection of documents, perhaps he can help out, he might have them.like I said, look at these and then ask for cast iron proof that the statements made under oath were true, which they have to be. Then look at the person who made the statements. Fast forward a few years, In the early part of 2010, a group of former residents brought judicial revue legal proceedings against the council because of what had gone on. When this happened, the council thought the game was up.This feeling of being found out caused another event in August 2010.The judicial revue people were quickly sorted out with their case and compensated,and non disclosure orders put in place so people could not find out what had gone on.look at what I told you to look at,and ask for proof. Then you will find out. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 09:03:23 on 28 May 2021 |
|
|
| Insider knowledge --is it this document? I cannot open it.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR COMPULSORY ...
http://services.salford.gov.uk › solar_documents
|
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 08:55:20 on 28 May 2021 |
|
|
| Inside knowledge------why dont you just post up the relevant part? is there some secret or reason for you not to? Where would someone get the evidence now?
As you state the council high command know about this I would like to take this opportunity to ask Paul Dennett to look into this and address it. What do you reckon Rayofsunshine? Is there a case to answer and will it be addressed? |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 19:23:00 on 27 May 2021 |
|
|
| To wrote at 10-35 . I can only suggest that you look at my post of 19th May, and once you have looked at the papers check the facts and the man who wrote them. The council high command already know whats gone on.They are not going to bring justice to anybody, it would cost far too much.Just look, you will see. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 10:35:12 on 25 May 2021 |
|
|
| Inside Knowledge. I still find it surprising you never thought to mention this until the Star was closing down?
As there is a reason why you cannot name names,
maybe you would be so kind at to put up the relevant bits on here and then Rayofsunshine can bring them to the attention of Paul Dennett so he can set about making amends for pathfinder in the area?
|
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 13:44:00 on 24 May 2021 |
|
|
| @Rayofsunshine: You didn’t answer the question, Ray. Why did you change your mind? On the TV today a Labour MP was saying they ‘did well in Salford and greater Manchester’, then said they don’t know what went wrong in Hartlepool, they then said they’d learn lessons from it. Firstly, Salford Labour should not be a blueprint for Labour nationwide given the dodgy dealings and lack of transparency. Secondly, how can Labour learn lessons if they don’t know what they did wrong? They don’t have a clue what they’re doing, that’s why they’re holding Salford and GM as a possible blueprint, they’re desperate. If national media were to put this Council under scrutiny it will expose what’s been going on here and damage Labour even more. Labour are completely and utterly lost as a party, that’s why Dennett can get away with gentrification and can it all ‘Civic Socialism’ when it’s nothing of the sort. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 11:39:19 on 23 May 2021 |
|
|
| @Cody,as I stated before,we can only hope that in his second term,Mayor Dennett gets to grips with Section 106. I agree that Cllr.Merry was not solely responsible for Pathfinder,but it was he who set the
tone over how complaints about the scheme were handled! Labour iñ Salford needs to right this wrong!
As for "tory lite",look no further than the clueless malcontents who have infested this site over the years! |
|
|
?
|
insider knowledge wrote
at 21:51:00 on 22 May 2021 |
|
|
| To wrote @ 9:03:39. I repeat what I said before. Just look at the 2 CPO applications that went before the court. In each there were statements made under oath. These statements said the council had planning permission, they said a developer was ready to do the work, and they said money had been allocated for the work.The council must be asked to prove all these statements are true. Then you must look at the man who made these statements to the court. I am not frightened of something or somebody, but there is a reason as to why I am not naming names. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 09:03:39 on 21 May 2021 |
|
|
| Insider knowledge, if you know something , why dont you just say what it is instead of hints? Are you frightened of something or somebody? |
|
|
?
|
Insider Knowledge wrote
at 18:08:10 on 19 May 2021 |
|
|
| To wrote at 12:40:37 on the 18th May. The truth of the matter is that things only recently clicked. The final piece was a conversation a couple of months ago with someone who was in the middle of it on the councils side. Just look at the paperwork that went to the CPO court, then ask for the evidence of what was said. Then just look at the man who gave all the evidence to the court. Then you can make up your own mind if it was legally amiss or not. Just look. |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 16:56:10 on 18 May 2021 |
|
|
| @Rayofsunshine: wrote 20.35 is right, why have you changed your mind about Pathfinder and the Council’s and Mayor’s ‘regeneration’ plans? Merry isn’t a one-man bulldozing and planning machine - others were involved. As for “nobody is ever Caesar”, I think that’s a copout. He has power, he is the Mayor of Salford, he makes a lot of decisions - many of them are indefensible. Again, £42 million lost, housing stock lost, somebody is responsible for that. It’s not just the mayor but his whole team. Not one of them have acknowledged it, yet they stand up and say Salford should be a blueprint for Labour nationwide? If that happens they may as well call themselves ‘Tory Lite’ because that’s exactly what this Council looks like to me. And “transparency”, they shot that down with threats of legal action and hiding the minutes of Council meetings when the Star started following what was going on. Do you really think they will approve of transparency regarding developers possible profits? It’ll be labeled “commercially sensitive” and be out of reach of many people, and if anyone tries to expose it they’ll be met with in-direct or direct threats of legal action. The Mayor and the Council don’t know the meaning of the word “transparency”. The sad thing is now the Star has closed we’re back in the dark again, there won’t be anyone exposing them and holding them to account, which is sorely needed. And I don’t expect that from the likes of the M.E.N etc. So it looks like Salford Labour’s ‘Tory Lite Project’ is full steam ahead. |
|
|
?
|
The Truth Hurts wrote
at 13:35:39 on 18 May 2021 |
|
|
| "nobody is ever Caesar" - but the Labour party fiddle like Nero whilst Rome/Salford burns. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 12:40:37 on 18 May 2021 |
|
|
| Insider Knowledge, why wait 11 years and until the Salfordstar is closing to say anything? If you knew something you should have said what it was years ago.
A bit like Ray suddenly laying blame many years later as the Star closes. With Ray, I think it is just a bit of lip service. Unless something was legally amiss, the coucil cannot address the " hurt and anger felt by many over Pathfinder and its aftermath" . True, they could start colecting planning fees and building social housing , but that doesnt help the people who suffered from Pathfinder. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 10:21:48 on 18 May 2021 |
|
|
| Cody,to coin a phrase,"nobody is ever Çaesaŕ!"
In all honesty thèŕe is a definite limit to what Mayor Dennett can do about the provision of housing in Salford. He should though be taking a very jaundiced look at the council's planning function;
why is it that oveŕ many years the planning committee failed to get to grips with Section 106 Payments?? In addition why does it appear that some
planning officers appeared to give a disproportionate "benefit of the doubt" to developers? "Regulatory Capture" or something else?
Finally the Mayor needs to ensure that theŕe's
full transparency when developers submit projected
profits on proposed property deals. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 20:35:55 on 17 May 2021 |
|
|
| Cody, I always thought that Ray was defending Pathfinder, and that is why it seems so strange this late in the day that he is now calling it a disaster and blaming Merry. |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 17:30:14 on 17 May 2021 |
|
|
| Actually Ray was defending Pathfinder not long ago now I think about it, saying the houses in Langworthy weren’t fit for purpose. I could be wrong or someone could have been pretending to be Ray? Can you set the record straight, Ray? |
|
|
?
|
inside knowledge wrote
at 17:13:07 on 17 May 2021 |
|
|
| Merry is on the ropes with this.It all adds up at last. The pathfinder was flawed. In late 2010, a serving councillor told a friend of mine that the council were desperate to find a developer for that site.No wonder, They thought they were in the shit with it. The people who took out the injunction in 2009, began formal legal proceedings in 2010, and this would have ended up on the desk of the man who had done the cpo case.It is there in the paperwork if you look at it. You also need to look at the man who did it, then the penny will drop for you as well. Just follow the advice of the others. They know the crap is going to hit the fan,That is why they are blaming Merry, but I bet there are others as well. Give it one more try Guy, you will be lucky,Merry will crap it. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 16:04:46 on 17 May 2021 |
|
|
| I find it very strange that Rayofsunshine has waited all these years to speak out against Pathfinder, especially as the Star is about to shut down after 15 years. Did no one ever speak out to John Merry about this at the time? All the lead members, local councillors and labour party members? Why is it only now that Ray is laying the blame onto John Merry?
QUOTE "The main culprit for this disaster was the Council Leader at the time,John Merry."
Nice timng Ray. |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 20:23:44 on 16 May 2021 |
|
|
| @ Rayofsunshine: That's good of you to acknowledge, but it's not just Pathfinder. Mayor Dennett has been in power for a full term now and he's continued with the "regeneration", which we know is really gentrification (see Mo losing his shop/business for recent evidence), the Star has posted evidence of this repeatedly. In a current example developers have got away without paying £42 Million in the last 2 years alone and also got away with not building 1000 homes. The loss of social housing and land to developers has lead to housing shortage (I know it's not fully the Council's fault but also national Gov policy), and then the Mayor stands up and blames it squarely on National housing policy and Government cuts, which is only half true. It's insulting to us all when he does this knowing full well it's not the full story, especially when he carries on letting developers off the hook. Do you not agree he is partly to blame for the loss of the £42 million, housing stock and land? |
|
|
?
|
Caesar wrote
at 19:34:42 on 16 May 2021 |
|
|
| "Et Tu Raymondo?"
Is this a last joke before the Star closes or are the new guard going to try to distance themselves from Pathfinder in Salford?
How exactly would Mayor Dennett "sincerely address the hurt and anger felt by many over Pathfinder and its aftermath"? Would it take the form of a pat on the back and a cheery "That was old labour. Were not like that" ? Or would it be financially compensating all the people who were ripped off, plus a hefty lump sum for all the crap they went through? It would be a bit difficult to reinstate their homes wouldnt it?
Who will the scape goats be Ray? |
|
|
?
|
bob wrote
at 17:00:18 on 16 May 2021 |
|
|
| Good comment from Ray there. I am 100% behind you there. It seems like you momentum lot are planning to shove Commander Scruffy under a bus as they say.I'll help you if you like to make sure you don't make a balls of it like you do everything else.. I am sure you will have no trouble getting a bus from your lefty mates who were on strike recently at Cheetham Hill. The problem is to get Scruffy and his fat arse under it, you will have to jack the bus up. No problem, I have a mate who fixes trucks, I am sure I can borrow a couple of heavy duty jacks to do the job. |
|
|
?
|
Whale oil beef hooked! wrote
at 15:19:55 on 16 May 2021 |
|
|
| I never, NEVER thought Ray would finally admit something like that about Pathfinder!!??? |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 10:54:06 on 16 May 2021 |
|
|
| Cody,as a Labour Party member I'm deeply ashamed of
how the council handled Pathfinder. The main culprit
for this disaster was the Council Leader at the time,John Merry. Merry in a delusional state,considers himself as "an intellectual" whereas
anyone in the know knows he's an an arrogant arsehole!
I,along with other members of Salford Labour Party, are pressing Mayor Dennett to sincerely address the hurt and anger felt by many over Pathfinder and its aftermath. We can but hope!
|
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 11:27:47 on 15 May 2021 |
|
|
| @ Rayofsunshine: You’re attacking the commenters again and not commenting on the article. Please, tell us what do you think of what the Star’s posted. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 10:22:12 on 15 May 2021 |
|
|
| @Wrote,if Socialism is "the problem" then what
is the answer? It certainly isn't Salford Tories who
have faìled to provide a coherent and equitable vision for oùr city - they're only interested in
defending middĺe class privilege !
Neither do petì bourgeois scrotes,like yourself have any solutions;yoù hijack real issues, such
as housing,ìn order to spew bile. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 14:16:48 on 14 May 2021 |
|
|
| Social cleansing! This LA has deliberately decimated communities around the centre of Manchester in pursuit of its own Notting Hill. Whole swaths of affordable homes demolished and replaced with ones no local can afford. Each area of decimation had at first needed to degenerate before regenerate, it was in that endeavour the elected members meet in secret to plan their vision. The mayor bleats in about austerity, omitting the hundreds of additional millions that poured into the coffers of those who went on a demolition spree of many a good community! Those same people are still plotting there visions of urban utopia in a socialist society , he’ll bent on destroying culture and the great people of Salford by introducing momentum cultists, forgetting the problems that have been around for decades. Those poor people pushed out of decent homes at knock down prices, and yet some people involved did very well out this whole saga! It’s no surprise there’s a housing shortage the LA demolished 1000s of houses and 1000s of Council stock too. Socialism can not be trusted |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 21:34:31 on 13 May 2021 |
|
|
| This is why I will never vote Labour ever again! It makes me so angry! Is Ray around to comment on this? Anyone else from the Council or who vote Labour? Explain all the above to me and tell me how it helps the locals (the poor/working class). I don’t want to hear about Tories and cuts, The Star has explained above it’s not all about national government policy, I want to know how the above helps us locals. And also tell my why I should ever vote Labour when Salford Labour do this to us? On The Star’s closing, it’s a massive loss to the people of Salford and for journalism in Salford. No one will ever question, hold to account and investigate the Council like The Star has! It’s such a shame! Am I right in thinking the The Star’s site will be left live for a while? If so, how long? It’s an important resource and snapshot of Salford politics and goings on for 15 years! The Star’s done more for the people of Salford than the MEN, The Advertiser (defunct) and the myriad of substandard excuses for journalists put together. It will be missed! Thank you for all you’ve done! |
|
|
?
|
bob wrote
at 21:03:17 on 13 May 2021 |
|
|
| Just look at this article .As I scroled down it,one thing caught my eye, Alices story, injustice from South Africa to Salford. I got thinking like I do about housing matters. So I looked at housing in Soweto. Who is worse off, the average person in Soweto or the average person in Salford.The average Soweto person earns 26500 rand per month,about £1320, but they can buy a new 2 bed flat for 600 000rand, about £30 000. a person earning 16 000 rand is also allowed to buy such a flat, and they pay 5000 rand a month, about £250. These people who live in Soweto are the poor South Africans, not the rich ones.For my money, the people in Soweto are better off than the people in Salford when it comes to housing, and they have the benefit of a bit of sunshine as well.It seems to me they have the right idea over there. People need housing, companies need to flog building materials, building companies need to build houses to make money,construction workers need jobs and banks need to lend money. It seems they got their act together over there. |
|
|
?
|
Annoyed. wrote
at 19:01:15 on 12 May 2021 |
|
|
| 2 simple facts
Former NDC ( New deal for Communities) FAILED in all aspects of the program
Present ICT ( inspiring Communities together ) Failing and still is
|
|
|
?
|
Ann wrote
at 18:53:27 on 12 May 2021 |
|
|
| New deal for Communities, finished exactly 10 years ago, What is there really to show what a load of rubbish things that are failed back alleyways wrecked more like a secondhand shop in some back streets, NDC never listen to the residents who lived here they didn’t care because they got good pay and pensions, The 10 year scheme was an absolute failure., I just wish the government would now come back to local people and ask them what they thought of the scheme and how is now affected their lives in theory it’s made it worse not better, failures of NDC
A broken Community
A rusty key that opens nothing
Cromwell and Albion Gardens wrecked
Non-affordable housing or social housing
Street scenes falling apart
20 Community groups all gone under
Smaller group called inspiring Community do not invest in the people of the area , f so there’s nothing to show for it
|
|
|
?
|
|
|
|
|
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.JPG)
(2).JPG)
(1).JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
(3).jpeg)
.png)
(1).JPG)
