Colchester link road must be built before 7,500 homes
Pam Cox, the city's Labour MP, said following an "infrastructure-first approach" was a "turning point" for the council."We've chosen to take control of our future - to plan for homes, schools, roads and surgeries together, not in isolation," she added.
Tendring District Council had already agreed to adopt the development with the same link road condition.However, questions have persisted over whether it would ever be able to go ahead.In 2020, the Conservative government agreed to fund the new road at a cost of £99.9m.But in 2025, the Labour administration said an "escalation of costs" left a £70m shortfall - and it was not willing to pay the difference.Housing minister Rushanara Ali insisted a new town could be built without the road, but it would consist of 2,500 fewer properties.Schools, a hotel, GP surgeries and sports facilities have been included in blueprints, as well as a rapid transit system.
Colchester City Council, which is run by a Liberal Democrat and Labour coalition, said it could begin funding bids after voting to proceed."This is our best chance to shape growth on our terms," Cox added. "I will continue to push for the funding and delivery of the infrastructure our residents deserve."Conservatives on Colchester City Council moved to delay the vote in a bid to force the government to stump up the £70m.They accused rival councillors of "giving away the best chance of forcing the government" to fund the road.Group leader Paul Dundas said: "We hope the gamble works and the money appears because Colchester is stuck otherwise. "We'll just hear more excuses and there'll be gridlock."
Follow Essex 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
Reuters
12 minutes ago
- Reuters
European leaders mull new sanctions on Putin, UK government says
LONDON, Aug 19 (Reuters) - The British government said on Tuesday European leaders were weighing additional sanctions to ramp up pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of a broader push to put an end to the war in Ukraine. The government said the so-called Coalition of the Willing, which met virtually on Tuesday, had agreed that their planning teams would meet with U.S. counterparts in the coming days to advance plans for security guarantees for Ukraine. They would also discuss plans to "prepare for the deployment of a reassurance force if the hostilities ended", a spokesperson for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer's office said. They added: "The leaders also discussed how further pressure – including through sanctions – could be placed on Putin until he showed he was ready to take serious action to end his illegal invasion." Ukraine and its European allies have been buoyed after U.S. President Donald Trump told President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Monday that the United States would help guarantee Ukraine's security in any deal to end Russia's war, though the extent of any assistance was not immediately clear.
Telegraph
12 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain's biggest threat isn't Starmer, but the next Labour leader
If the pressures and realities of being in Government seem to have overwhelmed and surprised a large number of Labour MPs, spare a thought for lowly members of the party. Being in office has always been an uncomfortable experience for the comrades. Mario Cuomo's famous dictum that 'we campaign in poetry and we govern in prose' never quite hit home with them. As the writer John O'Farrell once eloquently put it, being a Labour Party member while Labour is in office is like being a David Bowie fan when 'The Laughing Gnome' was in the charts. But these days the conflict between loyalty to party and loyalty to Socialism (always with a capital S) is keener than ever. The political world is in a state of flux and party members are being tested beyond the point of endurance by current government policy, as the recent Survation poll of more than 1000 party members demonstrates. More than seven in 10 paid-up Labour members said the Government was wrong to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation. An even larger proportion – 84 per cent – opposes the Government's continued support of the two-child benefit cap. How much more comfortable it was when the party was in opposition! When all members had to do to feel good about themselves was to complain about those evil Tories and talk of the blessed sunlit uplands of the New Jerusalem that would be established by Socialism one day. That's the thing about Labour: electoral victories are barely celebrated for a single day. And then the betrayals get underway by sell-out ministers and everyone starts complaining about the Government again. While most people recognise that being in Government inevitably means tough and unpopular decisions, Labour Party members are generally not among those people. Pontification is so much more appealing than actual governing and legislating. And so Keir Starmer – and particularly his MPs, those in Government as well as on the back benches – should be encouraged by this latest survey. For if his own party, the party that elected Corbyn as party leader twice, is unhappy with him, he must be doing something right. These are the people who think Ed Miliband – he of the Ed Stone, the 2015 general election result, the bacon sarny and the scourge of the oil industry – is the best performing Cabinet minister while Liz Kendall, who tried to rein in welfare spending and wants to get people off benefits and into jobs, is the least popular. I well remember the unexpectedly robust response I received on the doorstep in one of the poorest council estates in my former constituency, after the then Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition Government introduced the two-child cap on welfare benefits. I had expected local residents to be angry and resentful at this policy. Instead, aside from one or two directly affected, there was a general support for the notion that if better off couples had to limit their families to sizes that they could afford, less well-off families should do the same. That was an eye-opener. And Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, seems to have grasped the reality of that even as most Labour members continue to demand that those in work should pay higher taxes to fund larger families of those out of work. Those are the hard choices and harder realities that governments have to contend with on a daily basis. It's a reality that Labour Party rank-and-file members would rather not confront; that is not, after all, what they joined the party for. Perhaps if Corbyn and his co-leader Zarah Sultana ever get round to forming and naming their new Left-wing party, many of those unhappily remaining in Labour will make the switch to a party more willing to tell them what they want to hear. In the meantime, Starmer needs to imbue in his MPs a sense of discipline and a belief that the hard decisions made today will start to pay dividends when the next general election hovers into view.
Telegraph
12 minutes ago
- Telegraph
America the preferred destination as wealthy consider quitting Britain
A wealth tax by Rachel Reeves would trigger a wave of millionaires living in Britain to flee to the US as they seek to escape punishing levies, new research shows. More than 1,000 UK millionaires polled by Arton Capital said the US was their most preferred destination. Wealthy Britons will prioritise English-speaking countries and nations with favourable tax rates if the Government introduces a wealth tax. Growing interest in the US as a new home for British millionaires comes after Donald Trump cut taxes for America's wealthiest residents, and doubled the estate and gift tax exemption from $5.5m (£4m) to $11.2m per person, in a boost to the country's high-net-worth families. More than half of millionaires (53pc) polled were considering moving abroad if a wealth tax was introduced, while 60pc believed they could have a better quality of life outside the UK. Canada, Australia and the UAE were also found to be popular locations for relocation according to the research from Arton, which advises wealthy individuals on global citizenship programmes. The findings come amid concerns that a new levy on assets over £10m would drive people overseas and trigger a fresh exodus of the rich from Britain. Several Left-wing Labour figures, including Lord Kinnock, the former party leader, have repeatedly called for the introduction of a wealth tax. Last month Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, dismissed the idea as 'daft' and urged backbenchers to 'be serious'. Mounting pressure on the Chancellor to introduce a new levy on Britain's wealthiest comes as Ms Reeves faces a black hole of as much as £50bn in the public finances. Armand Arton, the chief executive of Arton Capital, said fears from Briton's wealthiest about a potential wealth tax showed the UK was at a 'tipping point'. He said: 'The uncertainty around the Government's proposed wealth tax mirrors the ongoing economic uncertainty seen around the world – from Trump's tariffs to conflict in the Middle East.' The research also revealed that 82pc of millionaires resident in the UK would consider investing in a golden visa or citizenship by investment programme, which allows individuals to gain residency or citizenship through financial investment. Arton offers a consultancy service to millionaires seeking out such programmes. Despite many millionaires weighing up a potential move abroad, 66pc of those surveyed said they still believed the UK was an attractive place to invest compared to other nations. Concerns about a new wealth tax come as the Government faces scrutiny over its approach to Britain's high-net-worth individuals and entrepreneurs. Many wealthy residents are already moving abroad after Ms Reeves scrapped non-dom tax status and introduced inheritance tax on overseas trusts earlier this year. Since the rule change there have been a series of high-profile departures, including Richard Gnodde, Goldman Sachs's vice chairman, who said he was relocating to Milan to avoid being hit by the scrapping of the non-dom status. The Office for Budget Responsibility said in January the abolition of the tax status would result in 25pc of non-doms with trusts leaving the UK, while 10pc of those without trusts would move overseas. Mr Arton said: 'There are many repercussions of the introduction of a levy, but one thing is clear: the longer that unpredictability persists, the greater the risk of losing capital, talent and long-term investment to countries that offer greater security for individuals, families and their futures.'
