logo
Will long-awaited Nottinghamshire road upgrades finally happen?

Will long-awaited Nottinghamshire road upgrades finally happen?

BBC News6 hours ago

Take a drive through north Nottinghamshire, and there's a good chance you'll find yourself stuck at Ollerton roundabout.As the point where several major routes meet, it often acts as a bottleneck for traffic from six different directions.Plans to upgrade both the roundabout itself and the surrounding roads have been in the works for years.Last summer Nottinghamshire County Council was supposedly "a matter of days" from getting the final confirmation - and crucially, the funding - to start the work.So confident was the then-Conservative administration that they even put signs up saying improvements were "coming soon".Then along came the general election.With the change of government, the project's future suddenly became unclear.But with the cash taps seemingly being turned back on this week, are spades finally about to go into the ground?
Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced on Wednesday billions of pounds of investment in transport infrastructure in England.
"It's very difficult to get capital funding out of central government."So says the Conservative councillor for Muskham and Farnsfield, Bruce Laughton.The A614 runs through his council division, and he says he's been lobbying for improvements for more than 15 years."It is essential for the north-south traffic through Nottinghamshire, and therefore [improving it] will have a major effect on the financial viability and the growth of this particular area," he said.A big chunk of the cash for the project was originally due to come directly from the Department for Transport.After a year of political upheaval, however, it looked like the burden would be shifted to the East Midlands Combined County Authority.When the Conservatives were in charge in central government, they promised the regional mayor would have £1.5bn to spend on improving connectivity – money saved from the cancellation of HS2 beyond Birmingham.
Speaking before the budget in the autumn, though, the Labour mayor Claire Ward said she was unsure if the money would arrive.Fast forward to this week, and not only was it confirmed, but the figure was higher than before."When Labour came into office, there were a huge number of schemes the Tories had promised funding for, and the money simply wasn't there," she said."After a year, we've been engaging with government, and I'm really pleased we've been allocated £2billion."
When the announcement was made by Reeves on Wednesday, however, the focus for the East Midlands was instead on a new mass transit system connecting Nottingham and Derby.Indeed, the Treasury press release didn't even mention the A614 project. Speaking to the BBC the same day, Ward said she wanted things to move "as quickly as possible", but appeared to stop short of giving any guarantees."There's still some outstanding bits of detail that we need to talk to our partners at Nottinghamshire County Council about," she said."We were going to make a contribution, and part of this money will help us to be able to have that money set aside ready for that contribution."
Nonetheless, the new leader of Nottinghamshire County Council, Reform UK's Mick Barton, welcomed the news."It'll have a massive impact; it needed doing years and years ago," he said."It's only got worse regarding the flow of traffic and the volume of traffic, so it will benefit everybody, whether it be the economy, the residents, the work people."All the signs are the project will get the green light, and while everyone I've spoken to this week seems to be supportive of it, there is also a sense of frustration that it's taken so long.After all, the council's former leader previously warned the plans were "already four or five months" behind schedule - that was eight months ago.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Badenoch says organisations should be able to decide if staff can wear burkas
Badenoch says organisations should be able to decide if staff can wear burkas

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Badenoch says organisations should be able to decide if staff can wear burkas

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has said employers should be able to decide if their staff can wear burkas in the workplace. Mrs Badenoch also said people who come to her constituency surgeries must remove their face coverings 'whether it's a burka or a balaclava'. Ms Badenoch posted a video on X of part of her interview with the Telegraph, in which she said: 'My view is that people should be allowed to wear whatever they want, not what their husband is asking them to wear or what their community says that they should wear. 'I personally have strong views about face coverings. 'If you come into my constituency surgery, you have to remove your face covering, whether it's a burka or a balaclava. 'I'm not talking to people who are not going to show me their face. 'Organisations should be able to decide what their staff wear for instance, it shouldn't be something that people should be able to override.' She added that France has a ban and has 'worse problems than we do in this country on integration'. On Wednesday, Reform's newest MP Sarah Pochin asked Sir Keir Starmer during Prime Minister's Questions whether he would support such a ban. Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice said his party has 'triggered a national discussion'. Asked if he wants to ban burkas, Mr Tice told GB News on Sunday: 'We've triggered a national discussion. I'm very concerned about them (burkas). 'Frankly, I think they are repressive. I think that they make women second-class citizens. 'We're a Christian nation. We have equality between the sexes, and I'm very concerned, and if someone wants to convince me otherwise, well come and talk to me. 'But at the moment, my view is that I think we should follow seven other nations across Europe that have already banned them.' He called for a debate on the topic to 'hear where the country's mood is'. Meanwhile, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said 'employers should be allowed to decide whether their employees can be visible or not', when discussing face coverings. Asked on the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme if the Conservative Party's position is not to speak to people who cover their face, Mr Philp said of Mrs Badenoch: 'Well she was talking specifically about her constituency surgery I think, and it is definitely the case that employers should be allowed to decide whether their employees can be visible or not. 'But I don't think this is necessarily the biggest issue facing our country right now. 'There's a legitimate debate to have about the burka. 'You've got, obviously, arguments about personal liberty and choice and freedom on one side, and arguments about causing divisions in society and the possibility of coercion on the other. 'That is a debate I think we as a country should be having, but as Kemi said, it's probably not the biggest issue our nation faces today.' Asked if he would talk to people who would not show their face, the Croydon South MP said: 'I have in the past spoken to people obviously wearing a burka – I represent a London constituency – but everybody can make their own choices, that's the point she was making, each employer should be able to make their own choices.'

The cruel government trick that drives voters to Reform: calling new homes ‘affordable'
The cruel government trick that drives voters to Reform: calling new homes ‘affordable'

The Guardian

time39 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

The cruel government trick that drives voters to Reform: calling new homes ‘affordable'

I have got used to a scene that has been repeated in wildly different places all over the UK. Close to the centre of a town or city, there will be a construction project, centred on the delivery of brand new apartments. The air will be filled with the loud clanking of machinery; a hastily finished show flat might offer a glimpse of what is to come. I have developed an unexpected addiction to these places, always photographing the hoardings that hide building work from passersby, which usually feature ecstatic thirtysomethings drinking coffee and relaxing in upmarket domestic environments (they are usually accompanied by slogans like 'live, work, relax, dream'). And I have come to expect a kind of encounter that goes straight to the heart of one of our biggest national problems. Up will walk a member of the public, looking sceptically at what is under way. Their words may vary but the basic message is always the same: 'Who's this for? Not me.' At the last count, 1.3m households in England were on local authority housing waiting lists, the highest figure since 2014. About 164,000 children live in temporary accommodation. Average rent increases in the private sector recently hit a record high of 9.2%. Figures just released by the Home Builders Federation show that the number of new homes given planning consent in England in the first quarter of 2025 was the lowest since 2012, something partly blamed on the absence of any government support scheme for first-time buyers. The market for homes people can buy remains a byword for exclusion and impossibility, which is why those new apartment blocks are always such a dependable symbol of fury and frustration. The same anger has long since seeped into our politics. Fifteen years ago, I can vividly recall reporting from the London borough of Barking and Dagenham about chronic housing problems caused by the mass sell-off of council houses, and the area's increasingly toxic politics. A 60-year-old owner of a bakery told me about her daughter, who lived with her four-year-old son in a privately rented flat full of pigeon droppings that had apparently made him chronically ill. They were on the council waiting list. 'But every time,' she told me, 'she's, like, number 200 or 300.' She and her husband, she said, were going to vote for the neo-fascist British National party. At the time, it felt as if what I was seeing still sat at the outer edge of politics. But these days, the same essential story has taken up residence at the heart of the national conversation: the BNP has been chased into irrelevance and protest votes now go en masse to Reform UK, and the connection between the housing crisis and the febrile state of the political mainstream is obvious. Certainly, it's impossible to grasp the salience of immigration without appreciating many people's visceral feelings about the scarcity of homes. In the inner circles of Keir Starmer's government, there must be voices keenly aware of the need to finally tackle all this. Some of the right instincts were evident in Labour's promise to oversee the building of 1.5m new homes in England by the end of this parliament. The chancellor has recently reiterated the aim of delivering the 'biggest boost in social and affordable housing in a generation'. But what that means and whether any such thing is on its way are still clouded in doubt. The clock is loudly ticking down to this week's spending review. Last weekend, the Greater Manchester mayor, Andy Burnham, addressed an event put on by the progressive pressure group Compass, and said Rachel Reeves should 'unlock public land for mayors to use to build a new generation of council homes at pace – akin to the drive of the postwar Labour government'. Housing associations have pleaded with the chancellor to reclassify social homes as critical infrastructure (a category that covers such essentials as food, energy and 'data'), which would allow increased funding to fall within her fiscal rules. Meanwhile, Angela Rayner – the minister in charge of housing, who is said to be fiercely attached to the dream of a social housing renaissance – is seemingly locked in intense last-minute negotiations with the Treasury. Although the budget unveiled in March contained an extra £2bn for the government's affordable homes programme in 2026-27, its own publicity material said this was merely 'a down payment [sic] … ahead of more long-term investment in social and affordable housing planned this year'. Rayner is reportedly pushing the plain fact that the ever-more doubtful 1.5m target will be missed without much higher funding. We will see what happens on Wednesday, but housing seems to have fallen out of the government's messaging. Of late, it has seemed that Reeves and Starmer think investments in defence and public transport are a much higher priority than dependable shelter. There is a vital point at the core of this issue. Even if Starmer has often given the impression that the answer to the housing crisis lies in clearing away planning law and letting corporate developers do the work, their ring-road faux-Georgian cul-de-sacs will not provide anything like the entirety of the solution. Social housing – which, at the scale required, needs to be largely the responsibility of councils – is not just what millions of British people need as a matter of urgency; it will also have to be hugely revived if the government is to meet its aims: 1.5m homes in a single parliament equates to 300,000 a year. The last time such a feat materialised was in 1977, when about half of all new-builds were delivered by local authorities. A new version of that story will not be easy to realise. Threadbare councils are in no state to play the role in a housing revival that they need to. The UK is also faced with a dire construction skills crisis: despite the government's plans to train 60,000 new construction workers, industry insiders are adamant that we will only build what's required with the help of building workers from abroad. But failure should not be an option: it will not just deepen this country's social decay, but also boost malign forces on the hard right, and present a huge obstacle to Labour having any chance of winning the next election. In the midst of last year's contest, I went to Aldershot, the old garrison town at the centre of a constituency that Labour won from the Tories on a swing of 17 points. Grand buildings once used by generals and majors were full of luxury flats, and the town centre was scattered with empty shops. There, I came across a new development called Union Yard, which was on its way to completion. It contains 128 student 'units', 82 properties for private rent, and a mere 18 classified as 'affordable' (which, in keeping with one of the grimmest aspects of the politics of housing, means they will be let for no more than 80% of local market rent), set aside for people over the age of 55. Not long before, the waiting list for council homes in the surrounding county of Hampshire had hit 30,000. On a Tuesday afternoon, I sat facing the images of the high life that adorned the development's outer edges, and had a long conversation with a twentysomething woman who was full of a striking mixture of sadness and anger. I knew what she was going to say, and it came out pretty much verbatim: 'Who's that for? Not me.' John Harris is a Guardian columnist

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store