Peterborough councillor calls for Werrington centre investment
A city councillor says a village centre has been "left behind" compared to other sites elsewhere in the area.Peterborough First city councillor, John Fox, who has represented Werrington ward for 23 years, opposed two recent proposals for the Werrington Centre which were ultimately refused by planners in April.He said he hoped the next applicant would meet with community representatives so they could "help to steer them in the right direction"."Most of the shops in the centre are run down, it's not what it used to be," he said.
A company named Gujjar Investments Ltd submitted two separate plans to Peterborough City Council for the Werrington Centre - one for a taxi office next to the vacant Ploughman pub and the other to turn the pub itself into a sports bars and three shops.Both were rejected on the grounds of noise and traffic concerns.
Fox, deputy leader of the Independent group, said: "To me, none of it made sense and the taxi office would've caused little rat runs."I've been a councillor now for 23 years.. and if they just came and spoke to us and Werrington Neighbourhood Council we could've liaised with them and saved them time and effort."If you look at the centres in Orton and Bretton compared to Werrington, we were left behind."The Ploughman pub closed in early 2024 and has since been sold and gutted.Fox added: "You've got to protect what you've got and improve with what you haven't got."Earlier this year, a former landlord of the pub, Andy Simmons, expressed serious concerns about the future of the Werrington Centre in the wake of the pub's closure.Gujjar Investments Ltd has been approached for comment.
Follow Peterborough news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
32 minutes ago
- The Independent
Fact check: 2025 spending review claims
This round-up of claims from the 2025 spending review has been compiled by Full Fact, the UK's largest fact checking charity working to find, expose and counter the harms of bad information. On Wednesday Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered the Labour Government's first spending review, outlining its spending plans for the next few years. We've taken a look at some of the key claims. How much is spending increasing by? At the start of her speech Ms Reeves announced that 'total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3% a year in real terms'. That headline figure doesn't tell the full story, however. Firstly, 2.3% is the average annual real-terms growth in total departmental budgets between 2023/24 and 2028/29. That means it includes spending changes that have already been implemented, for both the current (2025/26) and previous (2024/25) financial years. The average annual increase between this year and 2028/29 is 1.5%. Therefore, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said, 'most departments will have larger real-terms budgets at the end of the Parliament than the beginning, but in many cases much of that extra cash will have arrived by April'. Secondly, it's worth noting that the 2.3% figure includes both day-to-day (Resource DEL) and investment (Capital DEL) spending. Capital spending (which funds things like infrastructure projects) is increasing by 3.6% a year on average in real terms between 2023/24 and 2029/30, and by 1.8% between 2025/26 and 2029/30. Day-to-day departmental budgets meanwhile are seeing a smaller average annual real-terms increase – of 1.7% between 2023/24 and 2028/29 and 1.2% between 2025/26 and 2028/29. Which departments are the winners and losers? Ms Reeves touted substantial spending increases in some areas (for example, the 3% rise in day-to-day NHS spending in England), but unsurprisingly her statement did not focus on areas where spending will decrease. Changes to Government spending are not uniform across all departments, and alongside increases in spending on things like the NHS, defence and the justice system, a number of Government departments will see their budgets decrease in real terms. Departments facing real-terms reductions in overall and day-to-day spending include the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (this factors in reductions in aid spending announced earlier this year to offset increased defence spending), the Home Office (although the Government says the Home Office's budget grows in real terms if a planned reduction in asylum spending is excluded) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Did the Conservatives leave a '£22 billion black hole'? Ms Reeves made a claim we've heard a number of times since it first surfaced in July 2024 – that the previous Conservative government left a '£22 billion black hole in the public finances'. That figure comes from a Treasury audit that forecast a £22 billion overspend in departmental day-to-day spending in 2024/25, but the extent to which it was unexpected or inherited is disputed. The IFS said last year that some of the pressures the Government claimed contributed to this so-called 'black hole' could have been anticipated, but others did 'indeed seem to be greater than could be discerned from the outside'. An Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) review of its March 2024 forecast found an estimated £9.5 billion of additional spending pressures were known to the Treasury at that point in time, but were not known to the OBR as it prepared its forecast. It's true that this review didn't confirm the £22 billion figure, but it also did not necessarily prove that it was incorrect, because Labour's figure included pressures which were identified after the OBR prepared its forecast and so were beyond the scope of the OBR's review. We've written more about how the Government reached the figure of £22 billion in our explainer on this topic. How big is the increase in NHS appointments? Ms Reeves took the opportunity to congratulate Health Secretary Wes Streeting for delivering 'three-and-a-half million extra' hospital appointments in England. The Government has previously celebrated this as a 'massive increase', particularly in light of its manifesto pledge to deliver an extra two million appointments a year. Ms Reeves' claim was broadly accurate – data published last month shows there were 3.6 million additional appointments between July 2024 and February 2025 compared to the previous year. But importantly that increase is actually smaller than the 4.2 million rise that happened in the equivalent period the year before, under the Conservative government – as data obtained by Full Fact under the Freedom of Information Act and published last month revealed. What do announcements on asylum hotels, policing, nurseries and more mean for the Government's pledges? Ms Reeves made a number of announcements that appear to directly impact the delivery of several pre-existing Labour pledges, many of which we're already monitoring in our Government Tracker. (We'll be updating the tracker to reflect these announcements in due course, and reviewing how we rate progress on pledges as necessary). The Chancellor announced an average increase in 'police spending power' of 2.3% a year in real terms over the course of the review period, which she said was the equivalent of an additional £2 billion. However, as police budgets comprise a mix of central Government funding and local council tax receipts, some of this extra spending is expected to be funded by increases in council tax precepts. Ms Reeves said this funding would help the Government achieve its commitment of 'putting 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles in England and Wales', a pledge we're monitoring here. The spending review also includes funding of 'almost £370 million across the next four years to support the Government's commitment to deliver school-based nurseries across England', which Ms Reeves said would help the Government deliver its pledge to have 'a record number of children being school-ready'. The Chancellor also committed to ending the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament, with an additional £200 million announced to 'accelerate the transformation of the asylum system'. When we looked last month at progress on the Government's pledge to 'end asylum hotels' we said it appeared off track, as figures showed the number of asylum seekers housed in hotels was higher at the end of March 2025 than it was when Labour came into Government.
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
A reckless splurge we (and our children) will be paying off for years: Voters brace for tax hikes as Rachel Reeves embarks on unprecedented spending spree
Voters were last night braced for swingeing tax rises, after Rachel Reeves embarked on an unprecedented spending spree. In a return to Labour 's tax-and-spend approach, the Chancellor set out plans to 'invest' a staggering £4 trillion to fund 'the renewal of Britain'. She said the plans, which include another huge dollop of cash for the NHS, would end the 'destructive' austerity of the last government and boost economic growth. Labour strategists hope the costly gamble will pay off by cutting hospital waiting lists, improving the creaking infrastructure and pump-priming the economy. But experts warned the scale of the spending, coupled with the deteriorating public finances, will pave the way for another round of damaging tax rises this autumn. The Conservatives accused Ms Reeves of adopting a reckless 'spend now, tax later' approach. The Chancellor insisted her plans could be funded by the eye-watering tax rises she imposed last year. She refused to rule out tax rises this autumn, saying only that taxes 'won't have to go up to pay for what's in this Spending Review'. But the small print of yesterday's Treasury document already includes one significant new tax hike, with the Chancellor pencilling in council tax hikes that will add more than £350 to an average Band D bill by 2029 to help fund local services and the police. Asked to rule out further tax rises, Treasury minister Emma Reynolds said: 'I'm not ruling it in, I'm not ruling it out.' Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride said Ms Reeves had 'completely lost control' of the public finances and the Spending Review was 'not worth the paper it is written on'. He predicted that a 'Corbynist catalogue' of tax rises would follow this autumn. Mr Stride told MPs: 'This is the spend now, tax later review, because the Chancellor knows that she will need to come back here in the autumn with yet more taxes, and a cruel summer of speculation awaits.' Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the public finances were so tight that the Chancellor would need further tax rises if 'anything at all goes wrong with the current economic forecasts'. Tom Clougherty, of the Institute of Economic Affairs, said Ms Reeves had failed to address the crisis in the public finances, adding: 'We should brace ourselves for tax increases in the autumn, and a summer of speculation over exactly where they will fall.' On a day that will frame the political debate for the next election: Police chiefs warned of cuts to the front line, after Yvette Cooper emerged as one of the few losers from the spending bonanza; Ms Reeves piled further pressure on the Home Secretary by announcing a target to empty Britain's asylum hotels by the next election; The Chancellor said new funding for the health service would deliver an extra four million tests and procedures by the end of the decade; NHS chiefs said much of the extra cash would go to fund above-inflation pay rises for doctors and nurses; Ms Reeves suggested defence spending will be frozen at 2.6 per cent of GDP in the latter years of this parliament, despite Nato pressure to double it to 5 per cent; Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner secured a £39 billion boost for social housing after weeks of bruising battles with the Treasury; Ms Reeves ripped up the Treasury's value-for-money rules in order to pour cash into Red Wall seats where Labour is being challenged by Reform; She announced £15 billion for transport projects including a revamped 'Northern Powerhouse' rail project. Yesterday's Spending Review covers government plans for the next three years. Treasury sources said it totalled £4 trillion. Day-to-day spending is £190 billion higher than planned by the last Conservative government, while spending on capital projects is £113 billion higher. But the figures do not include the soaring welfare bill, or the cost of servicing the UK's debt mountain, which totals more than £100 billion a year. The review also relies on implausible plans to achieve efficiency savings of £12 billion a year. Any of these factors could tip Ms Reeves into breaking her fiscal rules later this year. She has yet to set out how she will pay for a U-turn on winter fuel payments, which is forecast to cost £1.25 billion. And she is under pressure from Labour MPs to end the two-child benefit cap at a cost of £3.5 billion and to scrap planned cuts to disability benefits totalling £5 billion. Labour's former shadow chancellor John McDonnell welcomed the spending on long-term capital investment but said Labour had to 'learn the lessons' of the winter fuel debacle and loosen the purse strings on welfare. He told Sky News: 'We cannot be seen as the austerity party by imposing cuts on the poorest in society... There will have to be tax increases – we need redistribution.' The spending package follows months of bitter Cabinet infighting over how to allocate government spending for the coming years. The Chancellor yesterday said her choices would deliver on the public's priorities. She said her 'driving purpose' was 'to make working people, in all parts of our country, better off'. But she acknowledged that many voters had yet to feel any difference from Labour's first year in office.
Times
40 minutes ago
- Times
Date of ‘tax freedom day' is latest for 40 years
The tax burden on workers is greater than at any time over the past 40 years and is likely to rise to a record level within three years, according to a free-market think tank. The Adam Smith Institute says 'tax freedom' day falls on Thursday, six days later than last year and 20 days later than before the pandemic. It has not been this late in the year since 1985 when the Thatcher government was attempting to rectify the disastrous public finances after the economic crises of the 1970s. Tax freedom day is a symbolic indication of how long into the year the average person would have to work to pay their annual tax bill, with all money earned thereafter going to themselves. The think tank says that under government tax and spending plans, tax freedom day in 2028 will not arrive until June 24, which would be its latest date. That would make the tax burden higher than it was during the Second World War or the Napoleonic Wars. It adds that tax freedom day could fall more than halfway through the year as soon as 2030 unless the government changes course, meaning taxation will exceed 50 per cent of net national income for the first time. This year, the 'cost of government day', which factors in borrowing as well as taxes, is July 22, the latest date since the pandemic. The think tank has also released data showing the extent to which the tax burden is being shouldered by the rich. It reports that in the last tax year, the top 1 per cent of earners paid 28.2 per cent of total tax liabilities with the top 10 per cent paying 60.2 per cent. It noted: 'With their share of liabilities steadily increasing over the last 25 years, many wealthy taxpayers are leaving the UK altogether.' The think tank predicts that Britain is on course to lose a greater proportion of millionaires than any other country over the course of this parliament, 'raising questions about the viability of our current tax regime'. James Lawson, the chairman of the Adam Smith Institute, said: 'Britons are now working nearly half the year just to pay taxes — and the burden is only getting heavier. A tax system that consumes 162 days of our working year is simply not sustainable. It stifles our economic growth, productivity and our long-term prosperity. 'What's even more alarming is that, unless we reverse course, the UK is on track for taxes to swallow more than half of national income by 2030. This would take us beyond anything seen even during the world wars or the economic crises of the 1970s, raising profound questions about the nature of our economic model. He added: 'Politicians from all parties must ask themselves whether they want a country where work is penalised, innovation suppressed, and families see more of their income swallowed by the state each year. If we are serious about turning around our stagnant economy, we must start by cutting taxes.' Sarah Coles, head of personal finance at the investment platform Hargreaves Lansdown, said the freezing of income tax thresholds was where most ordinary people were paying more tax. She said: 'Last tax year, there were 37.7 million taxpayers, and we handed over an eye-watering £301.9 billion in income tax — up 10 per cent in a year and up 37 per cent since 2021-22. The pain is far from over, because these thresholds are frozen until 2028.'
