Council approves plans to partially pedestrianise Ipswich street
Local taxi drivers had previously criticised the proposal, as it could cut the number of taxi bays on the street.Mo Ali, a cab driver who objected to the plans, said reactions on the ground hadn't been positive and highlighted fears the plans would discriminate against people with mobility problems.
The proposal to transform Lloyds Avenue was voted in by councillors at the planning and development committee meeting, with two voting against the proposal, and one abstention. Sam Murray, a Conservative councillor at the authority, said: "As a wheelchair user, I don't care if it looks nice; I care about whether I can get on it comfortably, especially if I have to go a bit further to get a taxi."The plans form part of the wider Ipswich Town Deal, funded by the government's Towns Fund.A Labour councillor who welcomed the proposals, Kelvin Cracknell, said: "I take the taxi driver's concerns about picking up people who struggle walking up Lloyds Avenue from [the bottom] end, but I don't consider that a material consideration."Several potential alterations to the Lloyds arch undercroft were also mentioned, with all councillors voting in favour of the proposed changes to add an art installation and digital screen.
Follow Suffolk 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 Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
Dining across the divide: ‘It was like a communist interrogation'
Occupation Data engineer Voting record Usually Conservative, but didn't vote in the last two elections – 'The parties seem broadly the same. Nobody really stands by the manifesto' Amuse bouche This isn't Michael's first career – he started his working life as a history teacher Occupation Mainly a student, but works on social media and campaigns for the Workers party Voting record The Workers party; has also voted Green Amuse bouche Sophia can recite the full lyrics to Billy Joel's We Didn't Start the Fire. Can also sing it, but only when she's been drinking Michael She was covered in a bunch of communist pins; it came off as a little bit of an intentional caricature. My first impression was: younger than I thought and wearing her politics on her sleeve, literally. Sophia I was expecting someone more rightwing, more Reform-like, but I found him pretty interesting, in regard to his abstinence from voting and his lack of interest in any of the key parties. Michael I ate some salt and pepper squid and a cod loin. Sophia I had the sourdough margherita pizza and a couple of glasses of rather nice Romanian red wine. Michael Governments' first duty of care is to their own citizens, which means migration needs to serve the interests of the people already here. Relatively unchecked mass migration doesn't seem to do that. Being someone who went through all the legal hoops – moving to the UK from Canada – the idea that I could have simply lost my passport, shown up and not had to wait in line for anything, that's not ideal. Not being able to do anything about foreign people who take advantage of the UK's astonishing generosity isn't great. Sophia He was essentially saying, 'We need growth but how are migrants going to generate that?' He felt that it would be detrimental to the migrants' own countries, in that they'd be losing their own assets. But they're leaving because they aren't seen as assets. They're leaving because of corruption, poverty, different human rights. It's not as simple as he thinks: migrants don't necessarily have a choice. Michael The situation we're in serves large corporations and keeps everyone addicted to low-wage labour. It makes our GDP look good, but it's reducing our standard of living, and that includes the people we're importing. If we want to help the whole world thrive, are we doing anyone else any favours by saying to other countries, 'Yes, we'll have all your doctors and nurses, thanks'?Sophia He looked at everything from his individual perspective as an economic agent. I think he lacked empathy, and I said that to him. He responded that I was being overly idealistic – but he was being idealistic as well, in terms of his own capital interests and what served them. If I had a penny for every time he called me idealistic, I could repair the economic conditions he's so worried about. Michael She was very keen to talk about Gaza. I don't think either side is very nice in this case. I don't have a strong opinion, except that it is atrocious. Sophia I don't see it as a war. I see it as unjustifiable violence for nationalist aims. Having a two-state solution is completely wrong, because it's only rewarding Israel for what it's done. It should be one democratically run state. Michael Everybody should have the right to be left alone. When we start having laws around misgendering, I think: look, I prefer people to be polite, but people are allowed to be impolite, and making special rules based on someone's whim is weird. Sophia I'm a gender abolitionist. He doesn't like jargon, whereas I quite like that people use labels, because that makes it feel more real, as opposed to people thinking they're abnormal. Michael I tried to be polite and stay for the duration, while she was eating. Looking back, I berate myself for not walking away sooner. It was the most communist interrogation a guy can have without ending up with bamboo shoots under his nails. Sophia It wasn't that the conversation dried up or that we hated each other; we just said goodbye. I think it was on good terms. I was probably not the sort of person he'd choose to interact with. Additional reporting: Kitty Drake Michael and Sophia ate at Riding House, London WC1 Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take part
North Wales Live
13 hours ago
- North Wales Live
DWP explains how it will stop people fraudulently claiming £749 monthly payment
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has recently confirmed it remains "committed" to combating fraud and error within the benefits system, including recouping debts arising from Personal Independence Payments (PIP). Conservative MP Sir John Hayes questioned the DWP about what measures it is implementing to "tackle people fraudulently claiming PIP". In a written reply, DWP Minister Andrew Western outlined fresh measures being rolled out to "prevent fraud entering the system based on the types of cases and trends we have seen". This encompasses "introducing more rigorous checks for customers changing personal details, including bank accounts". Mr Western stated: " DWP is committed to tackling fraud and error in the benefits system and to the recovery of debts, including those generated by Personal Independent Payments. Working closely with counter fraud experts, the DWP has introduced measures to prevent fraud entering the system based on the types of cases and trends we have seen," reports the Daily Record. New DWP measures to tackle benefit fraud These include: Strengthening the Identity and Verification Process to prevent fraudulent cases entering the system Introducing more rigorous checks for customers changing personal details, including bank accounts Delivering awareness sessions for Case Managers and Healthcare Professionals, reinforcing action to take when suspicious cases are identified - for example, fake documents The Minister continued: 'DWP is delivering against key counter fraud activity, including investing in counter fraud professionals and building data analytical capabilities. The new Fraud, Error and Debt Bill will bring forward new measures to tackle fraud in the system. 'Details on the measures the Government will be legislating will be presented to Parliament in due course.' The DWP pays benefits to nearly 24 million people across Great Britain, including 3.7m on PIP. The latest DWP report shows £330m was lost to fraud and error in the PIP system last year, up from £90m in 2023/24. Fraud and error in the welfare system cost the taxpayer £9.5bn in overpayments last year, compared to £9.7bn in 2023/24. Fraud This guidance on explains that this relates to claims where all three of the following conditions apply: the conditions for receipt of benefit, or the rate of benefit in payment, are not met the claimant can reasonably be expected to be aware of the effect on their entitlement benefit payment stops or reduces as a result of a review of the claim. Claimant error These are overpayments where claimants have provided inaccurate or incomplete information, or failed to report a change in their circumstances which has led to an overpayment, but there is no evidence of fraudulent intent on the claimant's part. Official error This is where benefits have been paid incorrectly due to a failure to act, a delay or a mistaken assessment by the Department, a local authority or His Majesty's Revenue and Customs, to which no one outside of that department has materially contributed, regardless of whether the business unit has processed the information. PIP changes in circumstances There are several changes in circumstances people receiving PIP must tell the DWP about or risk losing their benefit entitlement and having regular payments paused or stopped. It's important to be aware that changing your name, doctor, health professional or address do not need to be reported to the DWP and will have no impact on your payments or your award - but it is worthwhile ensuring the details DWP holds on file is up to date. However, leaving the country or planning to leave the country for a period of more than four weeks - even just for a holiday - may affect entitlement. Guidance in the current edition of the PIP Handbook on states: 'This change may affect the claimant's entitlement to PIP. We will need to know the date the claimant is leaving the country, how long they are planning to be out of the country, which country they are going to and why they are going abroad.' If you're due to travel abroad over the next few weeks, make sure you contact the DWP with the details they have asked for as soon as possible - and keep it in mind when booking for summer holidays this year. How to report a change of circumstances to DWP Contact the PIP enquiry line on 0800 121 4433 to report a change of circumstances - lines are open from 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday. Changes to daily living or mobility needs You should tell DWP if, for example, you need more or less help or support or the condition will last for a longer or shorter time than you previously told DWP about. This change may affect entitlement to PIP, the amount and the period of the PIP award. Leaving the country or planning to leave the country for a period of more than four weeks - even if this is a holiday This change may affect the claimant's entitlement to PIP. The DWP needs to know the date the claimant is leaving the country, how long they are planning to be out of the country, which country they are going to and why they are going abroad. Stays in hospital or similar institutions DWP guidance states both components of PIP cease to be payable 28 days after the claimant is admitted to an NHS hospital. Privately funded patients are unaffected by these rules and can continue to be paid either component of PIP. If a claimant is in hospital or a similar institution at the date entitlement to PIP starts, PIP is not payable until they are discharged. Care homes The daily living component of PIP ceases to be payable after 28 days of residency in care home where the costs of the accommodation are met from public or local funds. The PIP mobility component can continue to be paid. People who fully self-fund their placement are unaffected by these rules. If a claimant is in a care home at the date of entitlement, the PIP daily living component is not payable until they leave. Linked spells in hospital and a care home Spells in hospital are linked if the gap between them is no more than 28 days. The daily living component for spells in a care home is also linked if the gap between them is no more than 28 days. There is no link for the mobility component because payment is not affected when in a care home. Both components of PIP will stop being paid after a total of 28 days in hospital. The daily living component of PIP will stop being paid after a total of 28 days in a care home. If a claimant moves between a hospital and care home, or the other way around, these periods will also link. Imprisonment or claimant held in legal custody This change may affect the amount of PIP that can be paid to the claimant. The DWP needs to know the date the claimant was taken into prison or legal custody and the length of time they are expected to be there, if known. Detained in legal custody PIP ceases to be payable after 28 days where someone is being detained in legal custody. This applies whether the offence is civil or criminal and whether they have been convicted or are on remand. Suspended payments of benefit are not refunded regardless of the outcome of proceedings against the individual. Two or more separate periods in legal custody link if they are within one year of each other. Change of name This change will not affect payment or eligibility for PIP, but it is important the DWP has the most up-to-date details for the claimant. This change needs to be reported in writing - if the claimant phones to give these details, the DWP will ask for these details to be put in writing. The written notification must contain: full details of their previous name their new name details of any changes made to the bank or building society account into which PIP is paid, such as the name of the account or the account number their signature on the letter Change of account PIP is paid into The DWP needs full details of the of the name and address of the new bank or building society along with details of the new account including the name of the account, the account number and the sort code or roll number. Change of person acting for the claimant This refers to an appointee or someone with power of attorney for the claimant. This change is important so the DWP can make payments to the right person at the right time. They need the full name, address and contact details of the new person who is acting for the claimant. If the person acting for the claimant has moved or has different contact details, the DWP just needs the new details. Change of address This change, providing it is not a hospital or nursing home will not affect eligibility or payment of PIP. It is important the DWP hold the most up-to-date details for the claimant. They need full details of the new address the claimant has moved to, including the postcode and the date they moved. Change of doctor or healthcare professional This change will not affect payment or eligibility for PIP and is not mandatory once a decision on the PIP claim has been made. However, if the change happens during the claiming stage it is essential the DWP have the most up-to-date information. This will make sure the assessment provider has the right contact details to gather any further details they may require. The DWP needs the full name, address and contact details of the new doctor or health care professional. online handbook here.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Former Tory MPs ‘won't get free run' at next election under new rules
Former Tory MPs 'won't get a free run' at the next election under a tightening of party rules for the selection of candidates. There will now be no 'automatic right' for former Conservative MPs to stand as candidates in the next general election, according to party sources familiar with the changes. Previously, the party had a habit of allowing defeated MPs to stand again, but under changes to the process, a senior party source said 'everyone will be screened'. The future careers of former Conservative MPs have become a prominent issue in recent months, thanks to the rise of Reform UK. Nigel Farage's insurgent party has attracted media attention with a series of high-profile defections by ex-Tory MPs. Around three-quarters of former Conservative MPs are hoping to return to parliament, according to a survey by the group Conservatives Together. A number of senior Tory figures lost their seats at the last election and many are expected to launch political comebacks. They include Dame Penny Mordaunt and Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg. The source said: 'We want to be in a position where people are brought in for the right reason. The plan is that previous MPs who lost their seats will be required to go through a selection process so that we've encouraged everyone who wants to come back to express interest and put their applications in.' 'The reason is that there will be many ex-MPs who say, 'Yes, I want to stand, but I don't want to stand in my old constituency, I want to stand in a different one'. In which case they can apply and go through the selection process but they won't automatically get a free run,' a party source familiar with the changes said. 'There is also an issue around certain well-known people wanting to come back who have never been through the current process for selection and validation of candidates because it started after they were originally selected,' they added. Autumn conference Preliminary forms to express interest in standing again at the next election were sent to former MPs in July, The Telegraph understands. Approvals and possible rejections are due to start following the party's conference in autumn, according to those familiar with the process. Last month, Sir Jake Berry, a former party chairman who lost his seat to Labour at the general election, announced that he was joining Reform. Others include Andrea Jenkyns, a former minister who was elected as the Reform mayor of Lincolnshire in May, and David Jones, the former Secretary of State for Wales. Two weeks ago, Adam Holloway was the latest former Tory MP to defect, bringing the total number to 13. Only one sitting Conservative MP has ever defected to Reform, Lee Anderson, who did so in 2023, becoming the party's first MP. He won re-election as a Reform candidate last July. The Conservative Party has previously had a tradition of giving defeated MPs 'second acts' by allowing them to stand again, often in safer seats than those they previously held. They include Andrew Mitchell and Michael Fallon, both of whom returned to parliament after a defeat and went on to become cabinet ministers. Michael Portillo, a leadership favourite who suffered a shock defeat at the 1997 general election, was returned to parliament within two years as a Conservative by-election candidate. The move could cause a backlash from former Tory MPs hoping for another stint in parliament who have not yet decided whether to stay loyal or defect to Reform.
