From: jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com 
  
 On Mon, 08 Sep 2025 12:42:33 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: 
  
 > In message <109mbh2$3qh8d$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:14 on Mon, 8 Sep 
 > 2025, Jethro_uk  remarked: 
 >>On Mon, 08 Sep 2025 10:59:57 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: 
 >> 
 >>> In message <109m84c$6u3c$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:37:15 on Mon, 8 Sep 
 >>> 2025, 
 >>> GB  remarked: 
 >>>> [quoted text muted] 
 >>> 
 >>> Near where I live is a green-field site with planning permission for 
 >>> five or six detached homes. Two previous developers have thrown in the 
 >>> towel, not having got beyond the foundations (but no roads). At the 
 >>> latest asking price for the land, nobody could build a house and make 
 >>> any profit at all. 
 >>> So nobody is. 
 >> 
 >>Permission should have an expiry date, and come with a penalty for not 
 >>being executed. 
 > 
 > The permission does expire, but it's trivially easy to renew just 
 > before. 
  
 That is now, how about then ? 
  
 As I say, there are a plethora of ways to amend the various systems and 
 institutions around planning that could deliver new housing along the 
 scale of the 1930s. 
  
 However we are governed by people who are either captured by those who 
 benefit from the status quo, or who are viewing all problems as nails 
 whilst they wield a screwdriver. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)