Author: admin

But the new Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, published on Wednesday, scraps controversial proposals to make it harder to block development, after a Tory backlash.

Conservative MPs feared the plans cost them votes in crucial by-elections.

A source said Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove had listened to concerns.

It is understood a proposal for a zonal system will be dropped – which would would have seen certain areas earmarked for housing growth and some development applications automatically approved.

Ministers are also expected to confirm that legally-binding housing targets are being scrapped.

Instead, Mr Gove will promise communities control over what is happening in their area, with measures such as “street votes” allowing them to decide whether new extensions and other developments can go ahead,

Housing is a key challenge for the government, which pledged to build 300,000 houses a year by the mid-2020s. Sources say that target remains.

Making it easier to approve developments was a key part of its initial strategy after Boris Johnson won the general election in 2019.

The original plan would have seen local councils in England having to classify all land in their area as either “protected”, for “renewal”, or for “growth”.

Councils would then have had to look favourably on developments in “renewal” areas, whilst in “growth” zones, applications conforming to pre-agreed local plans would automatically gain initial approval.

Ministers also wanted to introduce binding local quotas.

But the plans sparked a significant Tory backlash – with some in the party saying the policy had contributed to by-election losses in former Conservative heartlands.

Those fears would only have been exacerbated by last week’s local elections results.

The government believes its new plans will give communities more of an opportunity to shape what happens in their area – and stronger grounds to resist unwanted developments.

Under Mr Gove’s plans, communities will be able to hold votes on whether planning permission should be granted for extensions to existing homes on their street.

But Labour MP Clive Betts, chair of the levelling up, housing and communities select committee, called the move a “gimmick”. He told the BBC it was “never going to be possible” for communities to “decide absolutely everything” about urban planning in their area.

Mr Betts said the process of building new housing should be simplified, with locals involved in decisions about where homes might be placed much earlier than at the planning permission stage.

Ministers are planning design codes, which would see local communities set rules about the layout of new developments and materials which could be used.

And they hope a new infrastructure levy – to be determined locally – will increase funds for projects such as schools, hospitals and roads by basing the sum on the value of the property when it is sold, rather than when it gets planning permission.

The planning system will also be digitised, making plans more accessible online.

Ministers want to modernise the system, which often sees notices on lamp posts to alert people to local proposals.

As in other high-profile urban electorates held by the Liberal-National government, so-called teal independents (because of a campaign colour preference) are mounting a serious challenge that focuses heavily on climate action, integrity in politics and gender representation. They’re bankrolled by the Melbourne philanthropist Simon Holmes à Court and his Climate200 Group, as well as other smaller donors.

In North Sydney, the sitting MP Trent Zimmerman has acknowledged he is under pressure from Kylea Tink, a former chief executive of the Jane McGrath Foundation, a cancer charity.

Campaign posters and fliers can be hard to find in the mid-autumn sunshine, but opinions among voters aren’t.

“It is a great pity that the independents are putting up such a fight against such an exceptional member of parliament,” explained Martin, a British migrant from Birmingham. “Trent Zimmerman is a fantastic person for the community. It’s a dire situation. I truly hope that he wins.”

Down the road I meet Shamarah, who’s upset not just with her local MP, but with the prime minister, too.

“Trent [Zimmerman] really just didn’t seem to care for the community, but it’s probably more the issue with [PM Scott] Morrison,” she said. “Most of us are really tired of the fact he won’t put a corruption committee in. He really [has] a lot of hot air. Change is needed,” “They are treating us like fools.”

Independent candidates aren’t new in Australian politics. Zali Steggall, a winter Olympian, famously unseated former prime minister Tony Abbott in another neighbouring blue-chip Sydney constituency in 2019. After a nail-biting federal poll in 2010, two regional independents in New South Wales – Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor – were part of the glue that held together a Labor government under Julia Gillard.

Political cleanskins could have a decisive say again this time around. Blue blood could be spilt in other three high-profile contests; in the seat of Wentworth in Sydney, and in the well-heeled Melbourne electorates of Goldstein and Kooyong, where the current federal treasurer Josh Frydenberg is at risk of being the highest-profile casualty. His ousting could cause longer term damage to the Liberal Party because he is seen as a potential – and popular – leader should Scott Morrison step aside.

“If it is a very close election they may hold the balance of power,” explained Antony Green, election analyst at the Australian Broadcasting Corp. “If the government loses, it will be mainly their seats that will be lost to independents. The government is arguing these independents mustn’t get elected because of the uncertainty it would create in the creation of the next government.”

The matter of gender fairness has never been more prominent in Australian politics after a raft of allegations of sexual assault and impropriety in government and beyond. For such a skilled campaigner, Mr Morrison seems to have misread the room on such a pivotal issue. There is powerful symbolism in Goldstein, Kooyong, North Sydney and Wentworth where there are four independent women taking on four Liberal men.

“There are lots of these women, mainly, running in these seats with good Liberal credentials and connections who are campaigning on the issue of climate change believing the government is not doing enough,” he added.

For years now, more Australians have been turning away from the two major parties; the centre-right coalition of the Liberal and Nationals, who traditionally represent country areas, and the left-of-centre opposition Labor Party.

Dr Stewart Jackson, a lecturer at the University of Sydney, has observed schisms on both sides of the spectrum.

“The Liberal Party has been moving steadily to the right under first [Tony] Abbott and then Morrison and the people who would otherwise have called themselves moderates or centrists have been, if not pushed out of the party, certainly marginalised in many of the states,” he told the BBC news website.

“It mirrors what has been happening in a number of other countries where there has been a move from particularly evangelical Christians, but also the deeply conservative right, to take control of the major party of the right,” he said.

Dr Jackson said this type ideological splintering has already hurt the other side of politics.

“It’s been an issue for the Labor Party since the rise of the Democrats,” he said, referring to a centrist party set up in the late 1970s. “But then more specifically the rise of the Australian Greens, with their vote now firmly established between 10-15% depending on the state. That’s 10% of the vote that the Labor Party used to able to count on as votes for them. So, they have already had the existential battle. For the Liberal Party it is a new phenomena.”

There could also be a reckoning for the current government’s junior partner, the Nationals. It promises to improve the services and lifestyles “of the almost eight million people who live and work beyond the nation’s [major] cities” but the party, which is over 100 years old, is now facing independent challenges of its own in its traditional heartland.

“It is really important to mention the regional independents. They know their communities really well and they might even be a higher prospect of being elected than the ones that are getting the high-profile coverage,” said Dr Andrea Carson, an associate professor in Politics, Media and Philosophy at La Trobe University. “We could see the largest cross-bench Australia has ever seen in [the] lower house.”

Some conservatives appear rattled as election day approaches. The teal independents have been dismissed as “a phoney group of green-left activists who want to trick people into voting for them”, according to Sky News Australia host Chris Smith. He didn’t hold back, adding that they “may even hold the balance of power and run this country into the sewer because of their useless and obsessive attempts to save the planet”.

But Dr Carson believes this election could help Australia finally shake off years of inertia on global warming because of divisions that have plagued Labor and the centre-right coalition.

“One of the things that has been really noticeable [during this campaign] is how little conversation the two major parties have committed at this stage to action on climate change,” she said.

In a country that relies heavily on coal for its electricity, policies to address rising temperatures have been toxic for both sides of politics, despite repeated warning from scientists of more severe droughts, bushfires and floods in Australia.

“The broader electorate wants action, which is why these independents might do well at this election because they are one of the few that are prepared to put it front and centre and talk about it,” explained Dr Carson.

North Sydney may have rich Liberal traditions, but one of its former MPs Ted Mack was the first of the modern independents in the 1990s. Voters will now decide if history will be repeated.

The violence capped a day of unrest that saw PM Mahinda Rajapaksa quit amid mass protests at his government’s handling of the economic crisis.

But it failed to calm demonstrators, who attempted to storm his official residence while he was still inside.

Seven people have died and more than 190 have been injured since Monday.

An island-wide curfew has been extended to Wednesday morning as authorities seek to quell the violence. Many protesters are still calling for President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, brother of Mahinda, to leave office.

Since last month Sri Lanka has been gripped by escalating demonstrations over soaring prices and power cuts.

On Monday, government supporters clashed violently with protesters in the capital Colombo outside Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Temple Trees residence, and then at the main protest site at Galle Face Green.

Police and riot squads were deployed, and tear gas and water cannons were fired at government supporters after they breached police lines and attacked protesters using sticks and poles.

Angry demonstrators retaliated, attacking government supporters and targeting ruling party MPs, including one who shot two people after a mob swarmed his car and then killed himself, according to Sri Lankan police.

As the night went on, mobs of protesters across the country torched houses belonging to the Rajapaksas, various ministers and MPs. This included a house turned into a controversial museum by the Rajapaksas in the family’s ancestral village in Hambantota in southern Sri Lanka.

Footage posted on social media showed homes enveloped in flames as people cheered.

Areas near the president’s official residence were also set ablaze, according to reports. A municipal lawmaker died in hospital after an attack on his house.

Following Mahinda Rajapaksa’s resignation, protesters attempted to breach the inner compound of Temple Trees where he was staying along with several loyalists, and set fire to a bus outside the home. Police fired shots in the air and tear gas in an attempt to disperse them.

Mr Rajapaksa was flown out of Colombo to an undisclosed location on Tuesday morning.

Elsewhere in Colombo, tensions remained high. Men armed with sticks and rods had established road blocks on the routes leading to and from the airport, and police and security forces – usually a common sight in the area – were nowhere to be seen, reports the BBC’s Anbarasan Ethirajan.

Sri Lanka is facing its worst economic crisis since gaining independence from Britain in 1948, and people are furious because the cost of living has become unaffordable.

The country’s foreign currency reserves have virtually run dry, and people can no longer afford essential items including food, medicines and fuel.

The government has requested emergency financial help. It blames the Covid pandemic, which all but killed off Sri Lanka’s tourist trade – one of its biggest foreign currency earners.

But many experts say economic mismanagement is also to blame.

The 64-year-old senator has so far won 56% of the vote, compared to 28% for rival Leni Robredo.

Mr Marcos’ victory would return his family to power 36 years after they were ousted by a popular revolution.

Critics allege his campaign was fuelled by misinformation, which he denies.

Turnout on voting day was high and previous elections in the country have largely been ruled to be fair. Isolated incidents of violence – including the shooting of three people near a polling station – were not reflected widely across the country, officials said.

But the BBC’s Howard Johnson in Manila says there are lingering questions about broken machines at polling stations and videos allegedly showing vote buying.

Opinion polls in the run-up to the election put Mr Marcos Jr ahead of his nearest rival, Ms Robredo, by dozens of percentage points.

Critics say this was the result of Mr Marcos Jr consistently painting his father’s rule as a “golden age” for the Philippines, whitewashing a period of rampant corruption and widespread poverty.

His father, Ferdinand Marcos, who became president in 1965, imposed martial law in 1972 and presided over a brutal regime which saw thousands of dissenters and critics jailed and killed.

Mr Marcos Sr, who died in 1989, and his wife Imelda stole an estimated $10bn (£8.1bn) from the Philippines’ coffers, becoming infamous examples of public graft.

There was a social media campaign to rebrand the old Marcos era, not as the period of martial law with its terrible human rights abuses, corruption and near-economic collapse, but as a golden age of crime-free prosperity.

This began at least a decade ago, with hundreds of deceptively-edited videos being uploaded to YouTube, which were then reposted on sympathetic Facebook pages.

These have persuaded millions of Filipinos that the vilification of the Marcoses after their downfall was unfair, that the stories of unrivalled greed were untrue.

And then there are the myths, widely believed in poorer parts of the Philippines, that the Marcoses do indeed hold vast wealth in offshore accounts or hidden stashes of gold bullion, but that these are being kept to benefit the Filipino people once they are restored to power.

But the pro-Marcos disinformation campaign also benefited from widespread public disappointment with the failure of the post-1986 administrations to bring significant improvements to the lives of poorer Filipinos.

Bongbong Marcos successfully portrayed himself as the candidate for change, like his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte, promising happiness and unity to a country weary of the years of political polarisation and pandemic hardship and hungry for a better story.

The younger Mr Marcos is not a newcomer to politics, having served in various elected positions over the years. He lost the 2016 vice-presidential election to Ms Robredo – a result he fiercely contested.

In the run-up to this election, critics say his campaign didn’t detail his plans or policies, and that he avoided debates where he might face independent questioning.

He held lavish rallies featuring pop music, comedy and dancing, where attendees were given freebies like wristbands and T-shirts.

Ms Robredo, who ran for president on the promise of a clean and effective government, also drew huge crowds at her “pink revolution” rallies.

The rival campaigns turned this into one of the Philippines’ most watched elections. Both candidates tried to woo those below the age of 30, who account for nearly half of the registered voters.

Mr Marcos Jr is set to inherit a country whose economy appears to be recovering from the pandemic better than expected.

But challenges, from high inflation to the aftermath of a brutal anti-drug campaign President Rodrigo Duterte, remain.

Mr Duterte, a hugely popular strongman-style leader, oversaw a notorious war on drugs that led to police killing thousands without trial, according to human rights groups.

His daughter, Sara Duterte, who ran for vice-president alongside Mr Marcos Jr, is leading by a wide margin of votes, partial results show.

The election was not just for the presidential positions, but also for senators, the lower house and regional officials across the entire archipelago.

The official count of all votes may take days.

A party source says “documentary evidence” shows Sir Keir Starmer’s team were working until 01:00 BST.

Durham police are investigating reports of a gathering where the Labour leader ate a curry and drank a beer at an MP’s office during an election visit.

Sir Keir has pledged to resign if he is fined over the allegations.

The Labour Party is confident it can prove that the gathering in April last year was permitted under rules that allowed work events, saying that those attending were working late on the campaign for the Hartlepool by-election.

The Guardian said the party has compiled time-stamped logs from WhatsApp chats, documents and video edits which show work continued after the takeaway food was delivered.

A party source said: “We have been totally clear that no rules were broken. We will provide documentary evidence that people were working before and after stopping to have food.”

In a statement on Monday, Sir Keir repeatedly said no laws had been broken, as he tried to contrast his position with that of Boris Johnson, who refused to resign after being fined by the Metropolitan Police over his birthday celebration at No 10 Downing Street in June 2020.

Having repeatedly called for the prime minister and Chancellor Rishi Sunak to quit after it was found they had broken the law, the Labour leader has come under increasing pressure to make his own position clear, with the Conservatives accusing him of “rank double standards”.

When asked if the Labour leader had now assumed a position of moral authority over the government, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse said: “I don’t particularly.”

Mr Malthouse refused to say whether Sir Keir ​should resign if he was fined, saying “that’s a matter for him” and Durham police should be given “the space and time to do their job”.

Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner, who was also present at the meal, said she too would resign if she was fined.

But Culture minister Chris Philp accused Sir Keir of “attempting to pressure the police into clearing him” by announcing that a fine would mean the end of his leadership.

Mr Philp said it was “deeply inappropriate”.

Durham police announced on Friday that it was launching an inquiry into the Labour event, having previously said it did not believe any offence had been committed.

It is thought the investigation could last up to eight weeks.

A video of the gathering on 30 April 2021, which took place in the constituency office of City of Durham MP May Foy, shows Sir Keir drinking a bottle of beer while colleagues in the background are eating.

Under the Covid laws in England at the time, indoor gatherings were banned – but there was an exception for “work purposes”.

Sir Keir said in his statement that “no laws were broken” and he “simply had something to eat while working late in the evening”.

He suggested even his critics did not really believe the allegation against him, but were simply trying “to get the public to believe all politicians are the same”.

“I’m here to say they are not – I believe in honour, integrity and the principle that those who make the laws should follow them,” he added.

“If the police decide to issue me with a fixed-penalty notice, I would of course do the right thing and step down.”

The Labour leader faced questions about whether he had left himself a loophole if police suggest he may have broken Covid rules, but do not issue a fine.

Durham Police previously came to a similar conclusion when they investigated the PM’s former adviser Dominic Cummings for driving to Barnard Castle during the first Covid lockdown.

Sir Keir said: “The penalty for a Covid breach is a fixed penalty notice, that’s a matter of law, and I’ve set out what the position is in relation to that.”