JamesBlurbs

The battery has a small catch to hold it in place, which an averagely strong person could probably break with their bare hands. And given the new retail price (see screenshot; even higher than I said) it’d definitely be worth stealing on its own. It’s totally normal to remove it when parked.

Not safe in terms of theft that is (the battery for my bike retails at over £500).

Also worth noting the disproportionate negative impact on disabled people who need electric assist. May be of interest to @wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk

My family and I just cycled over to visit the Tate Modern but have been refused entry because we had our cargo bike’s battery with us.

As most children-carrying bikes have electric assist these days and it’s not safe to leave batteries on them, this essentially bans families from visiting by bike.

FWIW I do agree we need more social housing specifically but (i) market rate housing doesn’t usually require public money to build it which should make it a lot easier to get it built and (ii) many people are struggling with housing need but are a long way off being eligible for social housing.

If the rents seem too high that looks very much like a supply/demand issue to me — which can be solved by building more homes.

This is anecdotal I realise, but as a former resident of a social housing block it seemed that flats seemed to be left empty for about six months between tenants. No idea why. However I doubt many private landlords would just shoulder a six month void like that.

And as you say keeping the hit of up-front SDLT for non-owner-occupied homes will be good if you want to give owner-occupiers a relative buying power boost.

Yes I can see that — so someone who paid tuppence h’penny in SDLT 40 years ago doesn’t “get away with it” — but it’d also be politically harder.

Yes the big up front cost of SDLT is a factor in stagnation in the property market, whereas an annual property tax based on value would actually encourage downsizing over the longer term. It feels like it could be genuinely good policy….

That makes sense, as there’d be an obvious unfairness to starting to charge someone who’s recently paid SDLT on their purchase the ongoing SDLT replacement as well.

Also the replacement seemingly wouldn’t apply to additional homes; presumably the deterrence of SDLT up front is seen as good there.

Yes it works for that, but probably less well for immediate government cash flow.

Seems particularly tricky bearing in mind that, with years of house price inflation, in a lot of areas of the country pretty normal houses often cost over £500k….

Does it mean that the tax will be levied annually but rolled up so it’s only charged when people sell? All very confusing.

Overall the tweet is an archetypal example of a politician diverting attention away from the need for building more homes by using the diversion of empty homes — which the numbers show can only have a small impact.

I’m not convinced that she isn’t being dishonest in saying that the “grey belt” proposals would only result in “luxury” (whatever we take that word to mean in this context — see also “executive homes”) housing being built.

And the key criticism of the tweet (which @jonnelledge.bsky.social makes more eloquently in his article than I could) is that the sole measure to increase overall housing supply she expresses support for only has a small role to play in solving the problem.

There is nuance missing in this debate. Some say reoccupying empty homes is the solution, some (e.g. Nick Bano) say tenure regulation, and some say building. In truth all three are desirable but the third is the one which is definitely needed at scale regardless of your wider left/right politics.

I appreciate that you personally might (rightly) think that reoccupying empty homes is only a small part of a much wider necessary solution (which involves quite a lot of building), but that’s not what the politician quoted was saying.

The article was in response to Zoë Garbett’s tweet, where reoccupying empty homes was the only supply measure (as opposed to tenure-regulation measure) she expressed support for and in which she explicitly opposed proposals to actually build more homes.

For all that my previous reply was a little flippant, I too would genuinely be interested to read an intelligent evidence-based critique/rebuttal of your article.

Yes please take me to this magical place, it sounds lovely.

TfL Cycle Sundays is back, offering unlimited free Santander Cycle rides every Sunday in August 🚲😎

tfl-newsroom.prgloo.com/news/tfl-cyc...

Thanks for your informed reply! From a layperson’s lived experience perspective (which I think is also useful in the context of public uptake), all the ASHPs I’ve come across have been close to silent unless you put your ear right up against the fan.

Heat pump noise is fine as long as everyone experiences exactly the same level of heat pump noise…or something like that?

Also worth noting that heat pumps aren’t generally actually at all noisy and the idea that they are is essentially a fabrication of the anti-net-zero brigade.

It’s also worth noting that correctly installed and maintained heat pumps are not, by most people’s standards, meaningfully noisy — and the idea that they are has essentially been invented by anti-net-zero campaigners.

This may be of interest to @hoxtonrich.bsky.social as I know you’re an interested watcher of this guy’s grim descent.

Not content with his role campaigning against LTNs, John Stewart is now giving quotes to the right-wing press campaigning against heat pumps (on spurious noise grounds).

“It’s nice here, but have you ever been to Baden-Württemberg?”

Anyone know what’s behind these flyposted German tourism marketing stickers? And wouldn’t they be more successful in Britain if they were in English?

London’s low-traffic zones ‘cut deaths and injuries by more than a third’ Exclusive: Study also finds no change in number of casualties on roads just outside low-traffic neighbourhoods

New research shows LTNs are making our streets safer.

10yrs of data in & around 113 London LTNs shows:

💚37% less deaths & serious injuries
💚No negative safety impact on surrounding roads

📉that's 600 fewer injuries (100 fewer deaths & serious injury)

www.theguardian.com/world/2025/j...