Archie Hall

The wacky schema that could leave one of Britain's biggest supermarkets with a billion-pound bill. From my latest blog, link in thread.

for those of you who are unaware, British employment commissions have in the past found that you need to pay people the same salary for *completely different jobs* if one job attracts more men and the other more women. and that this claim can be backdated to bankrupt you.

Only two years ago Labour pledged to allow 1.5 million homes to be built during this Parliament. Among people I know, one of the main reasons to vote Labour was the hope that they would build some houses. Since then, only ~217k new homes have been completed in England. Housing starts have fallen to their lowest in over a decade – even lower than during Covid. Housebuilding in London is down by 75% – to 5,891 starts in 2025 compared to a target of 88,000. This failure is shared by the Conservatives, who introduced a swathe of terrible building safety regulations after Grenfell that have made it impossible to build in London (and have, incidentally, helped to ruin many leaseholders as well). But Labour hasn't touched these rules. And it has done nothing of note to make it easier to build in other ways. It has also passed a Renters' Rights Act that locks landlords into tenants indefinitely unless they sell or move back in to the property. Tenants can challenge any rent rise, and face no penalty for wrongful claims (under the old system, they faced the risk of their rent being raised, which cannot happen anymore). The law even introduces de facto rent controls by allowing new tenants to immediately challenge rents they have just agreed to. It is designed to clog up the tribunals, and tenants have every incentive to challenge rent rises under any circumstance. The natural response of landlords has been to leave the market ever since these rules were first floated (again, under the Conservatives). That has driven rents up even higher and made it harder to find places to rent. Today the trend is so obvious that the government is now floating *explicit* rent controls, on top of the de facto ones introduced in the Renters' Rights Act. The doom spiral we are in is pretty clear: - Do nothing significant to expand housing supply; - Introduce "renters' rights" that make it much riskier and costlier to be a landlord; - When landlords sell their properties, driving up rents and the scarcity of rented homes, introduce 'temporary' rent controls. ← You are here - With an election looming, extend the rent controls so they are de facto permanent. - As even more landlords sell to flee the market, introduce a ban on selling rental properties into owner-occupation. - You have now expropriated 19% of the English housing market, and destroyed the build-to-let sector altogether. If I was a landlord, I would sell to get out of the market ASAP while it's still possible. For renters, this will make it even harder to find decent places to live and move around when circumstances change (eg, you have a new job or want to start a family). Much of the British left seems intent on destroying the private rental market. But Labour has also managed to preside over the worst collapse in housebuilding in modern times, apart from the financial crisis, after campaigning on promises to expand it. An abject failure in almost every way.

It would be completely wrong for a Government to stand by and allow companies to make excess profits from a war. That’s why we’re taxing these windfall profits to help with the cost of living. And why the Tories, Reform and the SNP are utterly wrong to oppose the windfall tax.