Universal ‘bullying' residents from their homes for £50bn theme park
The residents of Manor Road in Kempston Hardwick, said they are facing pressure to relocate to create space for the new 476-acre £50 billion Universal theme park.
Seven homes where the average price is £380,500 are believed to have already been bought by Universal and will be demolished to make way for the park and new dual carriageway.
Some residents have moved out after accepting formal offers for their homes, while others have had representatives visit their homes and ask them if they'd be willing to sell.
At least three of the homeowners have told Universal they do not wish to sell, and said they now fear for their future.
Claudia Pixley, 45, said she felt 'threatened' and 'bullied' by a representative working on the construction site for Universal when she said she was not sure if she wanted to move from the home where she lives with her seven-year-old daughter.
Ms Pixley has lived in her bungalow for ten years, and said she was approached by a construction representative to discuss what could happen.
She said: 'When I said I didn't want to move, he said 'if you're going to be difficult, we can build the theme park entrance opposite your house'.
'I couldn't believe it. It was threatening. We're just asking for basic human decency. I'd like to see someone come round and speak with us fairly.
Ms Pixley added that she and other residents are upset by the lack of communication from Universal and explained that a group of residents had 'descended' upon a parish council meeting in June after not getting answers.
She said: 'Between us residents remaining, we contacted the borough council and Universal – nobody would tell us anything.'
Plans for the Universal park – expected to be home to some of Europe's tallest rides reaching 377 ft – were announced by Sir Keir Starmer in April, and are slated for completion in 2031.
Universal claims the resort will create roughly 28,000 jobs and deliver a £50 billion boost to the economy.
Sir Keir said upon the announcement: 'Today we closed the deal on a multibillion-pound investment that will see Bedford home to one of the biggest entertainment parks in Europe, firmly putting the county on the global stage.'
Ritchie Wood, 54, has lived on Manor Road for ten years and said he would expect Universal to 'rehome him' if his landlord decided to sell.
Mr Wood, who works in construction, said: 'If they do buy it off my landlord, where am I going to go? They'd be taking away my home.
'I'd want Universal to rehome me. The theme park is a good thing for the economy but there needs to be some sort of fair compensation.
Universal Destinations and Experiences operates theme parks and resorts around the world based on the works of the entertainment conglomerate.
They are best known for successful film franchises include Fast & Furious, Jurassic Park, and Despicable Me.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Tread carefully with reform of bank ringfencing, chancellor
Rachel Reeves called it 'the biggest set of reforms to financial regulation in a decade', and, in one narrow sense, her Leeds Reforms would qualify for the description. If the ringfencing regime for banks were to be scrapped, we really would be entering a new era – or going back to an old one, since the separation of banks' retail and investment banking activities was the single biggest regulatory change introduced after the 2008-09 crash to try to prevent another blow-up. Reeves on Tuesday, however, merely announced a review to look at how reforms to ringfencing could 'strike the right balance between growth and stability, including protecting consumer deposits'. One hopes that does not mean outright abolition, which is what banks such as HSBC, Lloyds and NatWest have been urging on the grounds that the rules trap capital and impede growth. The stout defence of ringfencing from Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, has always felt more compelling: the regime has made banks safer and removal would increase the cost of loans and mortgages. It would surely be hard for a chancellor to override the Bank on this core question, especially when Barclays – which, in theory, might have most to gain from abolition as it has the largest investment bank – is also in the defence camp. A fudged outcome would see more activities allowed within the ringfenced entity. It is technical stuff, but also deeply important. Get it wrong and the cautious voices sounding the alarm over a government in search of a sugar-rush of growth via financial deregulation would have a point. Tread carefully, chancellor: ditching ringfencing in its entirety risks unlearning the lessons of the last crisis. In other respects, however, Reeves's red tape-slashing, investment-boosting, obstacle-removing reforms can be criticised in the other direction: yes, some changes are sensible tidying-up exercises but others are underwhelming. Take the showbiz headliner: the advertising campaign to encourage over-cautious savers to push a few quid into the stock market. The goal is admirable in itself for the reasons the Treasury gives: savers are doing themselves long-term financial harm if they do not understand that shares beat cash over most long-term periods. • Looser mortgage rules, which allow lenders to provide bigger mortgages worth more than 4.5 times borrowers' annual income. The move could help another 36,000 first-time buyers per year, according to the Bank of England • A permanent government-backed mortgage guarantee scheme, in which taxpayers will pick up the bill when a borrower defaults, in an effort to encourage participating banks to offer more 91-95% mortgages • A government-backed but industry-funded advertising campaign to encourage consumers to invest their cash savings in shares • Plans to allow banks to send information about 'investment opportunities' to savers that have cash sitting in low interest rate accounts, encouraging them to shift money to stocks and shares • A fresh review of ringfencing rules which were introduced after the 2008 financial crisis in order to protect consumer cash from a bank's riskier activities • A review of warnings attached to investment products to ensure that people are 'accurately' judging risk levels • Plans to 'radically streamline' accountability rules for senior bankers and finance bosses • Reining in the powers of the Financial Ombudsman Service, which settles complaints between consumers and businesses • Cutting the rate of interest – and therefore total compensation – paid out to consumers wronged by City firms and imposing a 10-year limit for claims • A new 'concierge service' to court international investors and create a one-stop-shop to promote the UK and provide tailored support to help businesses plan where to invest. But it's not as if the Treasury itself is doing much more than cheering from the wings. The ad campaign will be funded by the industry, which presumably could have launched the thing itself without government endorsement. At the very least, Reeves could have given the volunteers a hand by abolishing stamp duty on shares for purchases within ISAs. Even that gentle step was conspicuous by its absence. Tweaking risk-warning messaging may help at the margins. So will better access for retail investors to corporate debt and corporate fund-raising, as announced by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). But if Reeves is truly alarmed (as she should be) by the statistic that the UK has the lowest level of retail investment in the G7 group of rich economies, bolder measures are needed. It could take a generation to change saving habits to encourage 'informed risk-taking' but the crisis in the London stock market is happening now. Stamp duty remains the drag in the background, and is the real test of the Treasury's seriousness. Elsewhere, several reforms look justified: help for 'challenger' banks on capital rules; some loosening of rules to help first-time buyers; a trimming of the size of the authorisation regime for bank senior managers in the interest of efficiency; changes to allow the London Stock Exchange to quote dollar- and euro-denominated shares. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion A third pot of policies are straightforward lobbying victories for the City. That lot includes the neutering of the financial ombudsman service, but the banks may have had a point about the body acting as a 'quasi regulator' within the FCA. The timing of the reform looks terrible while the unresolved car finance affair rumbles on, but the regulatory setup did look basically confused. The onus now falls on the FCA to act sooner to spot looming scandals, which is not a wholly reassuring thought. But let's not overstate the significance of the Mansion House speech. Yes, the financial services industry deserves its place as one of the eight growth-driving sectors within the government's overall industry strategy; it's too big to ignore. But, despite some of the rhetoric, it's not as if the City is currently being strangled by regulation in the way that purer industrial sectors are being hampered by high energy costs. So don't go overboard on ringfencing reform: it is the bit that matters the most.
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
STILL a turn off! Fewer than one in eight watched BBC Scotland...despite it costing £200m
Fewer than one in eight adults watched the BBC Scotland digital channel each week last year - despite it having cost licence-payers more than £200million since its launch. The channel reached only 13 per cent of the population, the same figure as the previous year, and was watched for only an hour and 33 minutes a week by the average viewer. According to the latest BBC annual accounts for 2024/25, the cost of the channel, paid for by the licence fee, rose from £40million a year to £42million in the past year - and the cost per 'user hour' for the BBC Scotland channel and BBC Scotland content on iPlayer was 45p. Earlier this year, BBC Scotland's flagship news show Reporting Scotland: News at Seven was launched on the digital channel, replacing The Nine, which was axed after a row over low viewer numbers and too many repeats, with the new show attracting fewer than 30,000 viewers for its first episode. Last night Scottish Tory culture spokesman Murdo Fraser said: 'BBC Scotland bosses must address why Scots are not getting value for money when it comes to this channel. 'Given the sums involved they must ensure that they are investing in high-quality content that resonates with and reaches a far wider audience in Scotland.' News at Seven, a 30-minute show airing every weeknight on the BBC Scotland channel, aims to complement Reporting Scotland, the BBC One news programme which is screened at 6.30pm. It is presented by Laura Maciver and Amy Irons, who take turns fronting the show. The total cost of the BBC Scotland channel since its launch in 2019 is £204million. The Nine - which at one point reached just 1,700 people - ended last year along with entertainment news programme The Edit and weekly news review Seven Days. Last year media commentator and former BBC editor Professor Tim Luckhurst said: 'The number paying the licence fee has declined and the BBC faces financial challenges that can only be met by making staff redundant. 'For BBC Scotland to spend millions of pounds on a channel that attracts a tiny minority of the population in these circumstances is unreasonable. 'The BBC Scotland channel should close immediately - it costs money the BBC cannot afford.' The BBC was contacted for comment on funding for the digital channel. Meanwhile, the annual report said the BBC as a whole had screened 'content reflecting all of Scotland', including dramas Shetland, starring Ashley Jensen, Rebus – with Richard Rankin in the title role - and Granite Harbour, as well as documentary series Murder Trial, Inside Barlinnie [prison], and Sir Alex, about Sir Alex Ferguson, Britain's most decorated football manager. Award-winning The Agency: Unfiltered returned for a third series searching for Scotland's top influencer and attracting younger audiences. The report said 'Scotland-produced audio content' performed well on BBC Sounds and BBC Sport with Sportsound at six million plays. BBC Radio nan Gàidheal launched a 'celebration of new Gaelic song and composition', Òran Ùr. The report said 56 per cent of adults in Scotland consume BBC Scotland content on average per week, down from 57 per cent the previous year. Muriel Gray, chairman of the Scotland committee of the BBC, said: 'During the year, the committee has discussed and reviewed a number of critical areas, including major news changes introduced by BBC Scotland in January, BBC Radio Scotland's audience performances, the role of television drama in driving iPlayer growth, and the renewal of the BBC's partnership with MG ALBA.' In January, the BBC's new boss in Scotland claimed people may not be paying for a TV licence because of the cost of living crisis and the wide choice of programmes across streaming services. Ms Valentine, who became Director of BBC Scotland in October, defended News at Seven when she appeared before MPs at the Scottish Affairs Committee in the Commons. A BBC spokesman said: 'Fluctuations in recorded spend can be due to several factors including variations in the transmission dates of scripted content and special content, for example related to the Euros. 'This is reflected in the accounts. 'The BBC Scotland channel is the top performer after the leading 5 channels - BBC1, BBC2, ITV1, C4 and C5 - and audiences also watch the channel's content on the iPlayer. 'The cost per user hour for the channel has fallen year on year and in 2024/25, and BBC Scotland content had 1million weekly active users on iPlayer..'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Will Rachel Reeves's mortgage reforms help to ease the housing crisis?
Did somebody say ' populism '? As part of her 'Leeds reforms' to financial services, the chancellor wants to make it easier for first-time buyers on relatively modest incomes to own their own homes. Echoing the complaints of a generation of younger people, Rachel Reeves argues that tenants shouldn't be helping other people to pay their mortgages through exorbitant rents, and instead could be making themselves more financially secure in the long run. It all sounds very appealing, but there are problems, too... What does Reeves want to change? She wants to allow banks and building societies to lend money at 4.5 times a person's income, whereas the norm was once about two to three times, and to lower the minimum salary qualification from £35,000 to £30,000 per annum. She will also make permanent the government's mortgage 'backstop' guarantee scheme, which protects banks from default. The Bank of England is also ready to permit the banks to make riskier loans. Who is it designed to help? The government says some 36,000 additional mortgages will be approved in the first batch alone. So, quite a few potential voters. Will it solve the housing crisis? Obviously not; arguably, it might even make matters worse. In the first place, it is a small move, and there will still be many who don't earn enough, or have the capital available, to take advantage of the looser regulations. They will continue to rent (though the government is introducing the Renters' Rights Bill to give them some new protections). However, insofar as it does increase demand, it will make housing dearer. As has been well observed, the problem with the property market overall isn't a lack of demand but a long-running shortage of supply. Angela Rayner 's drive to build 1.5 million homes in this parliament will help matters somewhat, but it will take time. Are there any dangers? Yes. Memories of the financial crisis of 2008 are clearly fading, because it was the excessive provision of mortgages to sub-prime customers, and relaxed financial regulation, that led to the collapse of the world banking system, triggering a sharp recession and a long-term hit to global economic growth. It could happen again. For example, if there is a recession, people lose their jobs and the property market slumps (which it will one day), then these overstretched new borrowers are forced to sell their homes at a loss, which will often be suffered by the bank or building society. This in turn will reduce the capacity of financial institutions to lend, and send the economy into a credit squeeze and a downward spiral – not to mention bankrupting the unlucky first-time buyers. If the government effectively guarantees the loans, losses will be suffered by the taxpayer, and the national debt could be substantially inflated. Eventually, a large portion of the mortgage market could end up nationalised, which carries unacceptable risks. Not unless the housing market is in a permanent upswing. If not, then it is a potential catastrophe, and one that no government could (or should) survive.
