3,000,000 house to be built by Labour

[wendigo100]

I say let them all in and move elsewhere. Then leave Britain as the stinking hole it is deservedly becoming and when "global warming" kicks in Britain will sink and the probelm will dissapear. Millions of scivers and benefits blaggers dealt with in one fell swoop. Job done!!

Seriously though, I think we should follow Prescott's idea and build all 3 million new homes in the Thames Gateway. Fatso obviously did his homework because that will be the first area to sink if the sea level rises!

As an added bonus, there's plenty of room there and it's out of the way for the rest of us!

[hugebrain]

I agree with this in principle. However labour should make sure that they are not:

- £500,000 mansions
- sold to anyone with an exisitng house
- built entirely on green belt (there are lots of disused brown fields that needs regening before the green belt is touched).

I think everyone (except Sockpuppet) can agree that £500,000 mansions are exactly what we need - not £500,000 studio flats like we have now.

Also, building on the green belt (mostly wasted mono-culture farmland) is much better than building on brownfield (our gardens and playing fields).

It would be a good plan if they were sold on the open market, but sadly they will all be handed to Party members at subsidised prices, probably forcing up prices for the honest folk..

[TheRightStuff]

I agree with this in principle. However labour should make sure that they are not:

- £500,000 mansions
- sold to anyone with an exisitng house
- built entirely on green belt (there are lots of disused brown fields that needs regening before the green belt is touched).

500K mansions? where do I get one of those in the SE.

[bogeyman]

Also, building on the green belt (mostly wasted mono-culture farmland) is much better than building on brownfield (our gardens and playing fields).

I thought about countering this statement but the utter bloody stupidity of it left me too numb to do anything but sit at my keyboard an gawp like a landed trout.

[Chugnut]

I thought about countering this statement but the utter bloody stupidity of it left me too numb to do anything but sit at my keyboard an gawp like a landed trout.

Another trout, right here.

[hugebrain]

I thought about countering this statement but the utter bloody stupidity of it left me too numb to do anything but sit at my keyboard an gawp like a landed trout.

Am I wrong then? I thought brownfield included parks and gardens and allotments and playing fields, stuff that is pretty important in towns and cities.

Greenfield is for farmers getting subsidies to spray pesticides and raise genetically modified crops etc.?

[Ardesco]

Greenfield is for farmers getting subsidies to spray pesticides and raise genetically modified crops etc.?

And land left to nature, all of our forests are greenfield.

What do you think our wonderful nu Liemore government are going to dig up, farmers land or a few forests?

[Chugnut]

There are plenty of existing brownfield sites to use which wouldn't be to the detriment of the current inhabitants. Old sprawling abandoned industrial estates which the businesses have left for all the new landscaped business parks. Plenty of these could be redeveloped and relandscaped first without resorting to trashing the greenbelt.

They would have the added benefit of already having the vital (and frequently overlooked) supporting infrastructure - roads, drains, services.

[Zorba]

Do you think there should be a couple more definitions of land, so that brownfield and greenfield can't be abused?

E.g. greyfield - former industrial or boarded up housing estate
yellowfield - monocultured farmland
bluefield - flood plains that will flood the next time it rains.

[bogeyman]

Do you think there should be a couple more definitions of land, so that brownfield and greenfield can't be abused?

E.g. greyfield - former industrial or boarded up housing estate
yellowfield - monocultured farmland
bluefield - flood plains that will flood the next time it rains.

Good point.

'Brownfield' can mean almost anything the government or developers want it to mean.

Surely there should be gradations of 'used' land that take into account its suitability for building, difficulty to clean up, present amenity value to the community, flood risk etc.

This green/brown thing is a bit black and white, if you follow me.