Scot Parl petition: abolish planning permission for on sites up to 1 acre

Harold Davis

unread,

Apr 3, 2014, 8:42:22 AM4/3/14

to

This is to let people know of the Scottish Parliament petition urging the
abolition of planning permission requirements for owner occupiers building
accommodation on plots of up to 1 acre.

In other words, people will be allowed to build what they like on their own
small plots, to their own design, using whatever materials they choose.

The petition takes about 15 seconds to sign, here:

http://tinyurl.com/nckwfmx

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/GettingInvolved/Petitions/buildwhatyoulik
eon1acre

Everybody is welcome to sign, wherever they live in the wrld.

Please circulate!

Harry

Bill

unread,

Apr 3, 2014, 8:48:27 AM4/3/14

to

On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 12:42:22 +0000 (UTC), Harold Davis
<th...@is.not.a.real.email.address.invalid> wrote:

>This is to let people know of the Scottish Parliament petition urging the
>abolition of planning permission requirements for owner occupiers building
>accommodation on plots of up to 1 acre.
>
>In other words, people will be allowed to build what they like on their own
>small plots, to their own design, using whatever materials they choose.
>

On an acre you can build something pretty ghastly.

I'll bet he won't be allowing any four storey 'walk up' Formica clad
blocks of flats on the banks of Loch Lommond...

Geoff Pearson

unread,

Apr 3, 2014, 8:50:43 AM4/3/14

to

"Harold Davis" <th...@is.not.a.real.email.address.invalid> wrote in message
news:XnsA3048B6A6D...@78.46.70.116...

I don't think this a runner - the Scottish Parliament is not likely to allow
any old rubbish to be put up. Mr Farridge doesn't rule here yet, or ever.

Message has been deleted

harryagain

unread,

Apr 3, 2014, 1:21:33 PM4/3/14

to

"Harold Davis" <th...@is.not.a.real.email.address.invalid> wrote in message
news:XnsA3048B6A6D...@78.46.70.116...

Totally bonkers idea.
You would get all manner of heaps of shit erected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SND55maK6R4

Roger Mills

unread,

Apr 4, 2014, 7:18:30 AM4/4/14

to

Sounds like a totally crazy idea. Is there a mechanism for voting
*against* it?

Presumably it would only apply in Scotland? I'd hate to see anything
like that in central England, where I live.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

abelard

unread,

Apr 4, 2014, 7:24:53 AM4/4/14

to

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 12:18:30 +0100, Roger Mills <watt....@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 03/04/2014 13:42, Harold Davis wrote:
>> This is to let people know of the Scottish Parliament petition urging the
>> abolition of planning permission requirements for owner occupiers building
>> accommodation on plots of up to 1 acre.
>>
>> In other words, people will be allowed to build what they like on their own
>> small plots, to their own design, using whatever materials they choose.
>>
>> The petition takes about 15 seconds to sign, here:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/nckwfmx
>>
>> http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/GettingInvolved/Petitions/buildwhatyoulik
>> eon1acre
>>
>> Everybody is welcome to sign, wherever they live in the wrld.
>>
>> Please circulate!
>>
>> Harry
>
>Sounds like a totally crazy idea. Is there a mechanism for voting
>*against* it?
>
>Presumably it would only apply in Scotland? I'd hate to see anything
>like that in central England, where I live.

very small modifications could meet any legitimate concerns...
eg a simple basic building standards regulation...
and/or a requirement to build adequate fencing to your tents
or lean-to builds

--
www.abelard.org

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Snow_Flower

unread,

Apr 5, 2014, 10:57:44 AM4/5/14

to

On 03/04/2014 13:42, Harold Davis wrote:

Sounds like an excellent proposal.
You should be able to do what you wish with your own land.

amacm...@aol.com

unread,

Apr 6, 2014, 7:42:45 PM4/6/14

to

On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 12:42:22 +0000 (UTC), Harold Davis
<th...@is.not.a.real.email.address.invalid> wrote:

I think this is along the right lines but not quite.

I would advocate that the planning system as it is should be scrapped
as you suggest but adjacent neighbours should have a right to object
if they feel it impinges on the amenity or value of their property. If
the objections were credible and not frivolous a Reporter could be
asked to make a decision for or against the development.

Buildling control has a value in the safety of developments but it
could be streamlined to accept a wider spectrum of issues than it does
at present.

Hope you regards this as a reasonable comment.

peter

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 4:27:35 AM9/5/15

to

Combine with a requirement to house a migrant family as well.

--
Posted via WizPar!
http://www.wizpar.com/

abelard

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 5:15:44 AM9/5/15

to

On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 03:27:35 -0500, peter <Pe...@dawe.co.uk> wrote:

>Combine with a requirement to house a migrant family as well.

why do you want more 'migrants'?

--
www.abelard.org

peter

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 7:27:51 AM9/5/15

to

Precisely! We only need more housing to fit more in!

abelard

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 7:30:00 AM9/5/15

to

On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 06:27:50 -0500, peter <Pe...@dawe.co.uk> wrote:

>Precisely! We only need more housing to fit more in!

Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 8:34:01 AM9/5/15

to

abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 03:27:35 -0500, peter <Pe...@dawe.co.uk> wrote:

>>Combine with a requirement to house a migrant family as well.

> why do you want more 'migrants'?

The same reason you do, I suspect. Loads of impoverished Arabs = low wages
and higher profits for the toffs, bankers and 'nouveau riches'.

Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
'We do not have to apologize for anything. We are a people as all other
peoples; we do not have any intentions to be better than the rest. As
one of the first conditions for equality we demand the right to have
our own villains, exactly as other people have them. ... We do not have
to account to anybody, we are not to sit for anybody's examination and
nobody is old enough to call on us to answer. We came before them and
will leave after them...'
(Ze'ev Jabotinsky (1880 - 1940))
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>

abelard

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 8:45:06 AM9/5/15

to

On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:32:03 +0100, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
<yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote:

>abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 03:27:35 -0500, peter <Pe...@dawe.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>Combine with a requirement to house a migrant family as well.
>
>> why do you want more 'migrants'?
>
>The same reason you do, I suspect. Loads of impoverished Arabs = low wages
>and higher profits for the toffs, bankers and 'nouveau riches'.

you are seriously thick my boi...

you socialists are quite incapable of independent thought

why do you want more 'migrants'? is a question to a poster...

your reasons are your projections...

some highly populated areas are among the most wealthy places in
the world...some people may prefer that...

i would prefer to live in less crowded conditions, where as you
choose to live in some of the densest population centres in the
world...
doubtless made still more dense by your presence...

i must assume your reasons are as you state above:-

"Loads of impoverished Arabs = low wages and higher profits for the
toffs, bankers and 'nouveau riches'."

in a free society you can have your wish...and i can have mine...

of course, in the sort of society you yearn for, neither of us, nor
anyone else would have such freedoms

--
www.abelard.org

peter

unread,

Sep 5, 2015, 9:07:11 AM9/5/15

to

Ask American Indians, Australian Aboriginies, N Z Maori, Amazonian Indians or Palestinians if unrestricted immigration has benefited them!

Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein

unread,

Sep 8, 2015, 4:10:02 AM9/8/15

to

abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:32:03 +0100, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
> <yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>>abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 03:27:35 -0500, peter <Pe...@dawe.co.uk> wrote:

>>>>Combine with a requirement to house a migrant family as well.

>>> why do you want more 'migrants'?

>>The same reason you do, I suspect. Loads of impoverished Arabs = low wages
>>and higher profits for the toffs, bankers and 'nouveau riches'.

> you are seriously thick my boi...
>
> you socialists are quite incapable of independent thought

I want to congratulate you on posting content-free nonsense day in, day
out.

> in a free society you can have your wish...and i can have mine...
>
> of course, in the sort of society you yearn for, neither of us, nor
> anyone else would have such freedoms

Ah, 'freedoms', eh?

What a pity that you've now dodged this question...

How can he envy your 'freedom', when you both live under neoliberal,
capitalist régimes? Him in the UK and you (presumably) in France, or
wherever it is that your obsessive, 20-year-long efforts to conceal
your identity take you.

What 'freedoms' do you have that he doesn't?

... four times. No doubt five, in your response to this post.

A cynical man might think you're dodging it because you spouted utterly
meaningless shit again, and don't want to admit it.

Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein

'_The Guardian_. Wrong about everything. All the time'
(Anon)
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>