The rise and fall of The SNP.

[Roxy Hearts]

1 minute ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Christ on a bike how crazy would you be when peshed?

My comment was meant to be lighthearted but you proved my point. Ta.

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 minute ago, Roxy Hearts said:

My comment was meant to be lighthearted but you proved my point. Ta.

 

Oh dear the poor SNP fanatics who have had a humour by-pass (all of them by the looks of it). My comments were only poking fun. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

👍good to see things don't change and sanity is fine this New Year. Just checking James.

 

[Roxy Hearts]

2 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Oh dear the poor SNP fanatics who have had a humour by-pass (all of them by the looks of it). My comments were only poking fun. 

So we're mind bud. I'm not a member of the SNP.

 

3 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

 

😅

[Seymour M Hersh]

12 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

So we're mind bud. I'm not a member of the SNP.

 

😅

 

Well you do one heck of an impersonation of one. 

[Unknown user]

18 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Well you do one heck of an impersonation of one. 

 

Fair game to call you Tory gammon then?

[Savage Vince]

3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Fair game to call you Tory gammon then?

 

He most definitely is. 

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Savage Vince said:

 

He most definitely is. 

Well he does one heck of an impersonation!

[Roxy Hearts]

25 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Well you do one heck of an impersonation of one. 

In what way?

[Lord Montpelier]

51 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

lol

I've missed her cheeky little face on TV. Must be due another appearance soon to tell us what's next with her well considered plan of restrictions (sorry, protections)

[Roxy Hearts]

2 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said:

I've missed her cheeky little face on TV. Must be due another appearance soon to tell us what's next with her well considered plan of restrictions (sorry, protections)

Good for her. It's the Scottish Government's responsibility to look after their citizens. We don't always agree with their actions but that's governments for you. 

[lost in space]

Why was scottish parliament recalled?

So that Nicola could announce nothing?

Was it so Nicola could get her face on TV?

 

[Ked]

The scottish governments record on education is absolutely appalling.

Free tuition seems to have produced the opposite of what I suspect it intended.

Out of all the 4 nations Scotland is behind by a fair stretch when it comes to poorer students attending UNI.

Our primary school children have a poorer vocabulary.

And the SG are cutting 200 million from monies for education in deprived areas.

NHS waiting lists and in general the handling of health services has not met their own targets.

Housing and homelessness not being addressed.

Unless the SNP deliver a referendum it's difficult to see why people are voting for them.

Their record on the big hits that they have power over is shit to be blunt.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

12 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said:

I've missed her cheeky little face on TV. Must be due another appearance soon to tell us what's next with her well considered plan of restrictions (sorry, protections)

That's about it. She will be on the telly this week . 

[Roxy Hearts]

2 minutes ago, Ked said:

The scottish governments record on education is absolutely appalling.

Free tuition seems to have produced the opposite of what I suspect it intended.

Out of all the 4 nations Scotland is behind by a fair stretch when it comes to poorer students attending UNI.

Our primary school children have a poorer vocabulary.

And the SG are cutting 200 million from monies for education in deprived areas.

NHS waiting lists and in general the handling of health services has not met their own targets.

Housing and homelessness not being addressed.

Unless the SNP deliver a referendum it's difficult to see why people are voting for them.

Their record on the big hits that they have power over is shit to be blunt.

 

That's not my personal feelings on things. 

My children and grandchildren have had are having a great education. 

My daughter was at University and is now a teacher thanks to the SNP

I had superb service when treated for cancer. My father in law has Alziemers and the service both at home and directly with the NHS has been great.

 

It's not all doom and gloom but then again some folk have their agendas. 

[Ked]

2 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

That's not my personal feelings on things. 

My children and grandchildren have had are having a great education. 

My daughter was at University and is now a teacher thanks to the SNP

I had superb service when treated for cancer. My father in law has Alziemers and the service both at home and directly with the NHS has been great.

 

It's not all doom and gloom but then again some folk have their agendas. 

Oh of course let's not examine the facts or it's an agenda.

Glad for you and your kids.

I'm sure I could find anecdotal opposites.

But my post is based on an overview of the whole of education and health.

I welcome any argument which shows in relation to other similar countries how we are doing as a whole.

 

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Roxy Hearts said:

That's not my personal feelings on things. 

My children and grandchildren have had are having a great education. 

My daughter was at University and is now a teacher thanks to the SNP

I had superb service when treated for cancer. My father in law has Alziemers and the service both at home and directly with the NHS has been great.

 

It's not all doom and gloom but then again some folk have their agendas. 

 

I had a tumour found and removed pretty bloody quickly last year, I don't recognise these stories of the NHS letting us all down - they were there when I really needed them.

[Seymour M Hersh]

26 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

He most definitely is. 

 

Yes I'm a member of the Conservative Party. It's allowed you know. However I've still no idea what the "gammon" comments I've read are about. Some desperate attempt to label those opposed to the left in all it's forms is my guess but perhaps you can let me know. 

[Ked]

6 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Yes I'm a member of the Conservative Party. It's allowed you know. However I've still no idea what the "gammon" comments I've read are about. Some desperate attempt to label those opposed to the left in all it's forms is my guess but perhaps you can let me know. 

High blood pressure and white skin are needed to qualify.

 

[Unknown user]

5 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Yes I'm a member of the Conservative Party. It's allowed you know. However I've still no idea what the "gammon" comments I've read are about. Some desperate attempt to label those opposed to the left in all it's forms is my guess but perhaps you can let me know. 

 

You can't work out what gammon is? 

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

2 minutes ago, Ked said:

High blood pressure and white skin are needed to qualify.

 

 

Well 1 out of 2 ain't bad I suppose. 

Edited January 2, 2022 by Seymour M Hersh

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

You can't work out what gammon is? 

 

Egg on his face perhaps 🤔🤷🏾‍♂️😆?

[Ked]

12 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

I had a tumour found and removed pretty bloody quickly last year, I don't recognise these stories of the NHS letting us all down - they were there when I really needed them.

No one said the NHS let's us all down.

The SG record hasnt matched their own targets.

The biggest construction of new builds have both been appallingly managed .

Sturgeon was asked to be judged on Education and has failed on any recognised international marker despite the SG dropping 2 of those measurements and at one time failing to release the figures until after an election.

We are behind England Wales and Northern Ireland in attainment gaps by a fair margin.

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

6 minutes ago, Ked said:

No one said the NHS let's us all down.

The SG record hasnt matched their own targets.

The biggest construction of new builds have both been appallingly managed .

Sturgeon was asked to be judged on Education and has failed on any recognised international marker despite the SG dropping 2 of those measurements and at one time failing to release the figures until after an election.

We are behind England Wales and Northern Ireland in attainment gaps by a fair margin.

 

 

Nobody ever said that in that regard .

 

Ked, always be wary of the use of the POST. Politicians primarily on the left use it all the time.

 

Political Opposite Statement Test. “If no-one on earth can possibly disagree with a statement,” the Test states, “then the statement itself is utterly worthless, and possibly moronic.” 

Edited January 2, 2022 by Seymour M Hersh

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, Ked said:

No one said the NHS let's us all down.

 

 

Well that's just not true, there's seethe a plenty on the topic.

 

I do hope we get independence soon so we can get the SNP out and restructure everything.

[Unknown user]

15 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Egg on his face perhaps 🤔🤷🏾‍♂️😆?

Wahey!

[Savage Vince]

17 minutes ago, Ked said:

No one said the NHS let's us all down.

 

That's simply not true. It's been regularly trashed on this thread and other threads. 

[Pasquale for King]

5 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Well that's just not true, there's seethe a plenty on the topic.

 

I do hope we get independence soon so we can get the SNP out and restructure everything.

I think it’s time the unionists realise that the best way to get rid of the SNP  is for Scotland to be independent.
All bets are off after that and a new political landscape will emerge. 

If Salmond has said last time, or Sturgeon next time, “I’m off after a certain period after independence” it would be a vote winner.

[NANOJAMBO]

Just now, Savage Vince said:

 

That's simply not true. It's been regularly trashed on this thread and other threads. 

Indeed.

Several posters saying it's in a poor state through mismanagement, misuse of funds etc, etc. 

[Ked]

7 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Well that's just not true, there's seethe a plenty on the topic.

 

I do hope we get independence soon so we can get the SNP out and restructure everything.

I meant myself as in no one.

 

You want independence I know that.

I said there isnt or doesnt seem to be any other reason to vote for them given their record.

I can credit them with a few things but their governance as a whole over the past decade is there to be picked at.

I just cant see Scotland voting for independence anytime soon .

And while that's the case there are still a 40% who will vote for them despite their poor record.

Which like the tory vote is blind loyalty.

 

[Ked]

9 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

That's simply not true. It's been regularly trashed on this thread and other threads. 

I spoke for myself and I posted on the SNP record.

 

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, Ked said:

I meant myself as in no one.

 

You want independence I know that.

I said there isnt or doesnt seem to be any other reason to vote for them given their record.

I can credit them with a few things but their governance as a whole over the past decade is there to be picked at.

I just cant see Scotland voting for independence anytime soon .

And while that's the case there are still a 40% who will vote for them despite their poor record.

Which like the tory vote is blind loyalty.

 

I wasn't replying to you

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, Ked said:

I meant myself as in no one.

 

You want independence I know that.

I said there isnt or doesnt seem to be any other reason to vote for them given their record.

I can credit them with a few things but their governance as a whole over the past decade is there to be picked at.

I just cant see Scotland voting for independence anytime soon .

And while that's the case there are still a 40% who will vote for them despite their poor record.

Which like the tory vote is blind loyalty.

 

 

Your last sentence is shite, and if you genuinely don't get why, there's no point getting into it.

[Ked]

A couple of examples on Health .

Drug deaths which are wildly higher than anything in western Europe.

The sick kids hospital.

The Glasgow hospital.

 

But perhaps the one that doesn't get mentioned was the handling back of powers to westminster.

That which possibly affects health the most in an unseen way and which could be most keenly used to address problems of a Scottish nature.

 

[Ked]

6 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Your last sentence is shite, and if you genuinely don't get why, there's no point getting into it.

No let's try getting into it.

If the SNP do not deliver a referendum or independence will you still vote for them ?

 

There are those who will vote for the snp the same as the tories and hear nothing wrong said about them.

It's clearly the same.

When you read political forums the same defend at all costs is the same.

You may think the tory cause is shite but the blindly voting at any cost is the same.

 

[Maroon Sailor]

58 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I think it’s time the unionists realise that the best way to get rid of the SNP  is for Scotland to be independent.
All bets are off after that and a new political landscape will emerge. 

If Salmond has said last time, or Sturgeon next time, “I’m off after a certain period after independence” it would be a vote winner.

 

Not so sure

 

Sturgeon is power mad and an out and out control freak.

 

Nobody can lay a glove on her or are too frightened to take her on.

 

You only have to look at the Salmond inquiry to see how difficult she is to deal with.

 

 

Edited January 2, 2022 by Maroon Sailor

[Roxy Hearts]

2 hours ago, Ked said:

Oh of course let's not examine the facts or it's an agenda.

Glad for you and your kids.

I'm sure I could find anecdotal opposites.

But my post is based on an overview of the whole of education and health.

I welcome any argument which shows in relation to other similar countries how we are doing as a whole.

 

I've not met a single person amongst family, friends and work colleagues who have made detrimental comments about our NHS and education. Quite the opposite in fact. Feel free to take solace in the data you enjoy.

[Unknown user]

1 hour ago, Ked said:

No let's try getting into it.

If the SNP do not deliver a referendum or independence will you still vote for them ?

 

There are those who will vote for the snp the same as the tories and hear nothing wrong said about them.

It's clearly the same.

When you read political forums the same defend at all costs is the same.

You may think the tory cause is shite but the blindly voting at any cost is the same.

 

Do I vote SNP out of blind loyalty? No. Debate it all you like.

[Ked]

4 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

I've not met a single person amongst family, friends and work colleagues who have made detrimental comments about our NHS and education. Quite the opposite in fact. Feel free to take solace in the data you enjoy.

Wow

[Ked]

Just now, Smithee said:

Do I vote SNP out of blind loyalty? No. Debate it all you like.

I didnt single you out.

But you have stated once independence is gained you would want the snp binned.

Which it's fair to assume you are not happy with them.

 

[Roxy Hearts]

11 minutes ago, Ked said:

Wow

What's wrong with that? You're probably a unionist and look at things with a negative bent. I've got unionist friends and haven't heard any of them make negative remarks, is that allowed?

[Unknown user]

13 minutes ago, Ked said:

I didnt single you out.

But you have stated once independence is gained you would want the snp binned.

Which it's fair to assume you are not happy with them.

 

 

I don't think you understand what blind loyalty means

[felix]

On 31/12/2021 at 09:56, henryheart said:

 

I suppose it depends on what the result it is you are chasing. A classic example is planning, where local authorities are pressed into making big planning decisions within 4 months of receiving an application. I'm talking about shopping centres, large housing estates and the likes, not house extensions. The application may be totally hopeless and missing vital information and when asked to provide it the developer may dither about and take an age but at the end of the day who looks bad for taking an age to determining the application; yes, you've guessed it, the local authority.  It is not unknown for example, for an application for say 100 houses to be submitted knowing that the site is suitable for say, 70, with the aim through negotiation to get somewhere in between. This all takes time to sort out. Meanwhile the good old SG sits back and tells the Council that it is really going to have to improve. Does it matter about quality, that what is being built is going to be there for a generation, that people will have to live with it for the rest of their lives?  Well yes, but it appears not as much as the SG looking good by being able to say that it is  improving the planning system by providing a quicker turnaround of planning applications. 

 

 

 

Not sure what point you're making about planning & the SG . Planning legislation in Scotland, largely mirrors elsewhere in the UK.

If you think the quality of finished product is poor ; I'd agree . Seems more down to contruction contracts (PFI & NPD) focussing on long term private profit / short term fast track and associated poor construction / human error, This has led to some well know failures, some mentioned on this thread.

Quality's also linked to Building Standards as well as Planning. There's examples of the Scottish standards being better/more onrous than those in  England/NI.

 

If you're criticising SG for overseeing quick turnaround of Planning applications, recent pressure from UK govt led to fast track housing in particular . Major applications are 4 months as you say in Scotland. They're only 13wks in England, so they're turning round faster, but don't think faster = better. I'm comfortable with major applications, being considered properly.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

That's not my personal feelings on things. 

My children and grandchildren have had are having a great education. 

My daughter was at University and is now a teacher thanks to the SNP

I had superb service when treated for cancer. My father in law has Alziemers and the service both at home and directly with the NHS has been great.

 

It's not all doom and gloom but then again some folk have their agendas. 

 

My experience with education in Scotland's v. similar to yours.

 

 

 

[Roxy Hearts]

2 hours ago, felix said:

 

Not sure what point you're making about planning & the SG . Planning legislation in Scotland, largely mirrors elsewhere in the UK.

If you think the quality of finished product is poor ; I'd agree . Seems more down to contruction contracts (PFI & NPD) focussing on long term private profit / short term fast track and associated poor construction / human error, This has led to some well know failures, some mentioned on this thread.

Quality's also linked to Building Standards as well as Planning. There's examples of the Scottish standards being better/more onrous than those in  England/NI.

 

If you're criticising SG for overseeing quick turnaround of Planning applications, recent pressure from UK govt led to fast track housing in particular . Major applications are 4 months as you say in Scotland. They're only 13wks in England, so they're turning round faster, but don't think faster = better. I'm comfortable with major applications, being considered properly.

 

 

 

 

My experience with education in Scotland's v. similar to yours.

 

 

 

👍

[henryheart]

2 hours ago, felix said:

 

Not sure what point you're making about planning & the SG . Planning legislation in Scotland, largely mirrors elsewhere in the UK.

If you think the quality of finished product is poor ; I'd agree . Seems more down to contruction contracts (PFI & NPD) focussing on long term private profit / short term fast track and associated poor construction / human error, This has led to some well know failures, some mentioned on this thread.

Quality's also linked to Building Standards as well as Planning. There's examples of the Scottish standards being better/more onrous than those in  England/NI.

 

If you're criticising SG for overseeing quick turnaround of Planning applications, recent pressure from UK govt led to fast track housing in particular . Major applications are 4 months as you say in Scotland. They're only 13wks in England, so they're turning round faster, but don't think faster = better. I'm comfortable with major applications, being considered properly.

 

 

 

 

My experience with education in Scotland's v. similar to yours.

 

 

 

 

I was simply using planning as another example of the the SG's enthusiasm for the quick turnaround and how this can sometimes interfere with the very important matter of quality. I wasn't in any way seeking to compare it with the system in England or indeed anywhere else. In many respects the SG seems comfortable to go its own way on planning and indeed building standards but that does not mean that it is perfect; while both systems are without any doubt better than they are in England, the SG looks over its shoulder at what is happening there. You have indicated the fast tracking of housing applications in England as an example, and in building standards it took the Grenfell disaster amongst other building failures in England to persuade the SG that to open up the verification of building warrants to the private sector, as happens in England and Wales, is not presently in the public interest. 

 

When I was talking about quality, my focus was on design, considered by planning rather than construction as assessed by building standards, on which I take your point. Planning authorities should be judged by the build (and unbuilt) environment and the success of places for people to live, play and work in. The very fact that the SG has felt it appropriate under its modernising the planning system agenda to consider powers to penalise those planning authorities that do not meet time standards will influence priorities. If authorities, which struggle for staff resources anyway, are put under pressure they will make quicker decisions driven by time targets rather than quality on the ground. For the general public, the end users, does it really matter that a multi million pound development takes 5 months rather than 4 months because the planning authority was negotiating improvements? This takes me back to where this all started..... the resignation of the chair and deputy of the Drug Death Taskforce because they believe that the SGs demand for speed is counterproductive and driven by a desire to meet targets rather than achieving sustainable change.

  

[felix]

14 hours ago, henryheart said:

 

I was simply using planning as another example of the the SG's enthusiasm for the quick turnaround and how this can sometimes interfere with the very important matter of quality. I wasn't in any way seeking to compare it with the system in England or indeed anywhere else. In many respects the SG seems comfortable to go its own way on planning and indeed building standards but that does not mean that it is perfect; while both systems are without any doubt better than they are in England, the SG looks over its shoulder at what is happening there. You have indicated the fast tracking of housing applications in England as an example, and in building standards it took the Grenfell disaster amongst other building failures in England to persuade the SG that to open up the verification of building warrants to the private sector, as happens in England and Wales, is not presently in the public interest. 

 

When I was talking about quality, my focus was on design, considered by planning rather than construction as assessed by building standards, on which I take your point. Planning authorities should be judged by the build (and unbuilt) environment and the success of places for people to live, play and work in. The very fact that the SG has felt it appropriate under its modernising the planning system agenda to consider powers to penalise those planning authorities that do not meet time standards will influence priorities. If authorities, which struggle for staff resources anyway, are put under pressure they will make quicker decisions driven by time targets rather than quality on the ground. For the general public, the end users, does it really matter that a multi million pound development takes 5 months rather than 4 months because the planning authority was negotiating improvements? This takes me back to where this all started..... the resignation of the chair and deputy of the Drug Death Taskforce because they believe that the SGs demand for speed is counterproductive and driven by a desire to meet targets rather than achieving sustainable change.

  

 

The speed of major planning application turnarounds has little to do with end quality.

 

Grenfell's best not mentioned in an SNP-bashing thread.

It couldn't have happened in Scotland, due to decisive action by the SG in 2005, tightening up fire safety after the Garnock Court fire in Irvine.  Consequently, Grenfell's cladding didn't comply with Scottish Building Standards at the time, and wouldn't have received approval. Sadly it managed to evade the laxer system in England.

 

For balance, private sector verification of warrants in Scotland has been mooted long before Grenfell. The English sytem's been around for as long as I can remeber.  It works well & should be implemented up here, however the process by which warrants are approved, had nothing to do with the tragedy. You can only comply with the regulations set out in front of you.

 

Edited January 3, 2022 by felix

[henryheart]

1 hour ago, felix said:

 

The speed of major planning application turnarounds has little to do with end quality.

 

Grenfell's best not mentioned in an SNP-bashing thread.

It couldn't have happened in Scotland, due to decisive action by the SG in 2005, tightening up fire safety after the Garnock Court fire in Irvine.  Consequently, Grenfell's cladding didn't comply with Scottish Building Standards at the time, and wouldn't have received approval. Sadly it managed to evade the laxer system in England.

 

For balance, private sector verification of warrants in Scotland has been mooted long before Grenfell. The English sytem's been around for as long as I can remeber.  It works well & should be implemented up here, however the process by which warrants are approved, had nothing to do with the tragedy. You can only comply with the regulations set out in front of you.

 

 

Ok, I understand where you are coming from.

 

We will have to disagree on time not being a potential impact on the quality of planning decisions. I think that I have said enough on this.

 

We will also have to disagree on building standards. Clearly Grenfell could not have happened in Scotland because of the standards in place at the time, and as you also rightly say, private sector verification of building warrants was mooted well Grenfell happened. What you don't acknowledge is that Grenfell was part of a jigsaw that encouraged the SG to look at and ultimately reject a move towards greater similarity with the English system. This will most likely have included the process of how warrants are approved and how the regulations are interpreted. To say that you can only comply with the regulations as set out in front of you is an over simplification; the regs are not always black and white. Indeed, you will no doubt be aware that in Scotland there are dispute resolutions in place to consider interpretation of regulations that include both the SG and LABSS.  To say that the English system works well flies directly in the face of all the evidence. You only need to look at Dame Judith Hackitt's Independent review of the English Building Regulations and Fire Safety, in which she states, and I quote: 

 

"the primary motivation is to do things as quickly and cheaply as possible rather than to deliver quality homes which are safe for people to live in. When concerns are raised, by others involved in building work or by residents, they are often ignored."

 

She goes on to state:

 

"issues have helped to create a cultural issue across the sector, which can be described as a ‘race to the bottom’ caused either through ignorance, indifference, or because the system does not facilitate good practice. There is insufficient focus on delivering the best quality building possible, in order to ensure that residents are safe, and feel safe."

 

All this, once again, leads me back to the point of my original post; fixation with speed is not always the best idea if it is long term, sustainable and beneficial policies, procedures and decisions that you are after. 

 

[felix]

19 minutes ago, henryheart said:

 

Ok, I understand where you are coming from.

 

We will have to disagree on time not being a potential impact on the quality of planning decisions. I think that I have said enough on this.

 

We will also have to disagree on building standards. Clearly Grenfell could not have happened in Scotland because of the standards in place at the time, and as you also rightly say, private sector verification of building warrants was mooted well Grenfell happened. What you don't acknowledge is that Grenfell was part of a jigsaw that encouraged the SG to look at and ultimately reject a move towards greater similarity with the English system. This will most likely have included the process of how warrants are approved and how the regulations are interpreted. To say that you can only comply with the regulations as set out in front of you is an over simplification; the regs are not always black and white. Indeed, you will no doubt be aware that in Scotland there are dispute resolutions in place to consider interpretation of regulations that include both the SG and LABSS.  To say that the English system works well flies directly in the face of all the evidence. You only need to look at Dame Judith Hackitt's Independent review of the English Building Regulations and Fire Safety, in which she states, and I quote: 

 

"the primary motivation is to do things as quickly and cheaply as possible rather than to deliver quality homes which are safe for people to live in. When concerns are raised, by others involved in building work or by residents, they are often ignored."

 

She goes on to state:

 

"issues have helped to create a cultural issue across the sector, which can be described as a ‘race to the bottom’ caused either through ignorance, indifference, or because the system does not facilitate good practice. There is insufficient focus on delivering the best quality building possible, in order to ensure that residents are safe, and feel safe."

 

All this, once again, leads me back to the point of my original post; fixation with speed is not always the best idea if it is long term, sustainable and beneficial policies, procedures and decisions that you are after. 

 

 

I get your original point - that the SG has a fixation with speed on planning applications, but it's simply not correct. The conservative govt tried to speed up approvals in England around 4 yrs ago, arguably for the right reasons. As I said - the time process is more condensed down there. If the SG had an obsession with speed, they'd be doing something to draw level, or shorten timescales . It's irrelevant anyhow. Timescales quoted, are often simply extended - again for the right reasons - giving local authorities the time they need.

 

I know the  Hackitt review. On the Grenfell thread I mentioned I'd comissioned a report on ACM cladding, which was reviewed by the committee. The projects delivered cheaply, and the race to the bottom you quote, have nothing to do with the planning system.  Grenfell couldn't have happened in Scotland due to the SG's more advanced (and safer) fire regulations / building standards.

 

Look at the fire at Lakanal House in 2009 and how the government (Eric Pickles) reacted. The way in which the SG reacted to the fire in  Garnock Court, is why Grenfell shouldn't feature on an SNP bashing thread.

 

[henryheart]

I accept that Grenfell has absolutely nothing to do with SG and the SNP and I have never sought to suggest this;  it is not my intention to use it to bash anyone or anything (except the English BS system). Grenfell was quoted only in the context of the SG being able to be smug about its own BS system, thereby postponing any idea of adopting parts of the failing English system. 

 

You are correct in your observations in how timescales for determining planning applications can be extended, but we will have to disagree that the SG does not have a fixation on speed with planning applications. Each local authority has to annually prepare a  Planning Performance Framework and submit it to the SG for marking. These are intended to capture key elements of a "high-performing planning service". Guess what Key Performance Marker number one is? You've guessed it; decision-making: continuous reduction of average timescales for all (planning application) development categories. 

 

By the way, it is nice to have a polite and considered discussion. Thanks.  

[felix]

20 hours ago, henryheart said:

I accept that Grenfell has absolutely nothing to do with SG and the SNP and I have never sought to suggest this;  it is not my intention to use it to bash anyone or anything (except the English BS system). Grenfell was quoted only in the context of the SG being able to be smug about its own BS system, thereby postponing any idea of adopting parts of the failing English system. 

 

You are correct in your observations in how timescales for determining planning applications can be extended, but we will have to disagree that the SG does not have a fixation on speed with planning applications. Each local authority has to annually prepare a  Planning Performance Framework and submit it to the SG for marking. These are intended to capture key elements of a "high-performing planning service". Guess what Key Performance Marker number one is? You've guessed it; decision-making: continuous reduction of average timescales for all (planning application) development categories. 

 

By the way, it is nice to have a polite and considered discussion. Thanks.  

👍