The Good News thread, local jobs, economy etc

[davieG]

 

Up to 2,000 jobs could be created on a new business park.

The jobs are set to be created at Optimus Point, a 74 acre greenfield site at Glenfield.

The business park – which will include warehousing, offices, industrial units and shops – will take five years to complete.

Outline planning permission was granted to Wilson Bowden Developments following an appeal in 2011.

District councillors are expected to approve detailed plans for the first two warehouses, totalling 480,000 sq ft, this Thursday (Feb 5).

The council said those two units alone could create 500 distribution jobs, and make up a quarter of the eventual total.

Engineers have already began laying the infrastructure for the park which is in Kirby Road, close to junction 21a of the M1.

Wilson Bowden Developments is the commercial development arm of Barratt homes, based in Bardon Hill, near Coalville.

Barratt has already started building 250 homes on land next to the industrial site.

Wilson Bowden has previously said it would like to build 670,000 sq ft of warehousing, 210,000 sq ft of general industrial units, 189,000 sq ft of light industrial units, 78,000 sq ft of offices and 15,000 sq ft of shops.

A property investment business called M&G Real Estate said it had committed backing for the first two warehouses of 276,100 sq ft and 204,700 sq ft, and would acquire 24.3 acres of the site, subject to the detailed planning permission.

Wilson Bowden managing director Nick Richardson said: “This is a great start to the development and has enabled us to commit to the infrastructure which has now started on site.

“This activity has already generated a number of major enquiries since the New Year and we are confident of securing strong interest in the site.”

Andrew Windle, associate director for logistics and industrial at M&G Real Estate, said there was lots of demand for good locations close to the M1 and they were increasingly looking for “the right acquisitions that offer clear income potential and strong returns”.

A Blaby District Council spokeswoman said: “Granted outline planning permission on appeal in 2011, this combined scheme is set to provide 250 houses, a business enterprise centre, local shopping facilities, offices, warehousing and industrial space.

“Building work has already advanced on the adjacent Glenfield Park housing development.

“The council has been working pro-actively with construction training and apprenticeship company Construction Futures and Wilson Bowden Developments to maximise local employment, and to provide training for local unemployed people to fulfil the developer’s obligations for the site which will be rolled out to future phases of the development.

“Offsite highways works have already been made at the request of the Highways Agency and Leicestershire County Council to address the highways impact of the development.

“Further localised highways improvements are scheduled as part of the on-going development of the site.”

In a joint statement Wilson Bowden said it was increasingly working with Barratt’s house-building divisions on mixed commercial and housing projects.

It said: “Optimus Point is a good example of this, with the commercial and residential divisions working together, delivering enhanced value on a site that was originally identified as a pure commercial opportunity, now providing 18 acres of residential and 55 acres of commercial development land.”

Blaby District Council planning officers are recommending approval for the two warehouses on the site when the council’s development control committee meets on Thursday.

Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/2-000-jobs-create-new-business-park-Optimus-Point/story-25967183-detail/story.html#ixzz3QlwljeX5 

Follow us: @Leicester_Merc on Twitter | leicestermercury on Facebook

 

 

 

 

The Blue Tower

 Comments (0)

Insurance group Hastings is looking to become the latest tenant of the city centre’s imposing Blue Tower.

The business is considering moving into 50,000 sq ft of vacant space on the first and second floors of the 22-storey St George’s Tower, next to the train station.

If the move goes ahead it could create at least 120 jobs.

James Boyle, of Middlesex-based Infrastucture Investments, which owns the tower, said Hastings had looked around the vacant space, which has now been taken off the market.

“Like any large building we are in competition with other buildings and other cities,” he said. “We are delighted to give Hastings breathing space to make the right decision.

“We obviously hope they will choose this site.

“We will do everything in our power to make this deal happen.”

Hastings spokeswoman Maria Morritt said: “We are making progress on our plans for our site expansion review, but there’s still a lot of uncertainty. We will comment further in due course.”

Should Hastings go ahead with the move, it is understood that it would receive a £1 million grant from the Government’s Regional Growth Fund via the Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership. Hastings would then invest many more millions of pounds.

The insurer would join teaching firm Study Group, which signed a 25-year lease for 60,000 sq ft of the site last year.

Under that deal, the top 10 floors of the 269ft-high tower were converted into 165 rooms for overseas undergraduates, with other floors providing space for classes.

The tower is also home to a 135-room Premier Inn, 24 occupied apartments and a shisha cafe. If Hastings were to move in, it would leave about 70,000 sq ft of vacant space on the ground floor.

The complex had stood almost empty for more than a decade after its previous owner, London-based Magnet Property Investments, spent £33 million redeveloping it.

Magnet painted it garish blue. But the current owner, which took over early last year, has since toned down the colour.

Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Insurance-group-Hastings-Blue-Tower/story-25967191-detail/story.html#ixzz3Qlx4yHEF 

Follow us: @Leicester_Merc on Twitter | leicestermercury on Facebook

 

 

 

Nearly 2,500 jobs are set to be created in Leicestershire as more big-name businesses are poised to move into the county.

Well-known insurance firm Hastings and a major manufacturer, run by one of region’s richest families, are close to setting up large operations in the city, creating up to 470 jobs.

Meanwhile, developers say a business park on the outskirts of the city will bring work for about 2,000 warehouse, factory and office staff over the next five years.

News of the jobs boost comes less than a week after global computer giant IBM announced it was setting up a multi-million pound IT centre in the city, creating 300 hi-tech jobs.

Under the plans revealed today, up to 350 posts will be created by a new tissue manufacturer, which is set to build a factory in the city.

Leicester Tissue Company said it is planning to create the posts by March 2017.

Bosses are looking to set up a production site to supply toilet and facial tissue to supermarkets. However, a location has not yet been decided for the venture.

A spokesman said they were looking at three sites, but would not give further details.

The firm is owned by the Tejani family, who made their £140 million fortune while running a tissue maker in the city, which they sold in 2010.

A spokesman said: “The Tejani family sees an opening to re-enter the market place, there will be a major investment in the local economy, creating many new jobs in manufacturing.”

Meanwhile, Hastings Insurance Services is strongly interested in moving into the vacant first and second floors of St George’s Tower, widely known as the Blue Tower.

It is believed at least 120 jobs would be created by the move.

James Boyle, of Middlesex-based Infrastructure Investments, owner of St George’s Tower, said: “I can confirm that Hastings have looked around St George’s Tower and the space they were looking at has been taken off the market.”

A Hastings spokesman said it was currently considering its investment plans and would provide more details soon.

Both LTC and Hastings will each receive a £1 million Government grant towards the cost of their multi-million-pound investments, if they go ahead.

Tim Watt, chairman of Leicester Shire Business Council, said: “A lot of people have been working for a long time on these inward investment opportunities.

“There is a view that Leicester has not got the office space to attract these types of businesses, but this is a strong sign that perceptions are changing.”

The business park, called Optimus Point in Glenfield, has outline planning consent for a 74-acre greenfield site.

Councillors were expected to approve detailed plans for the first two warehouses, totalling 480,000 sq ft, tomorrow.

Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/2-500-jobs-set-created-Leicestershire-big-firms/story-25967186-detail/story.html#ixzz3QlxHbbSQ 

Follow us: @Leicester_Merc on Twitter | leicestermercury on Facebook

 

[MooseBreath]

Whatever the truth, it's to our advantage to be world leaders in renewables for both environmental and economic reasons so if it helps to sell it by pretending we are "saving the planet" then so be it.

Not sure the Germans would agree with that. Though I do agree that cheap, clean energy would be a huge economic boost the problem is that renewables aren't currently anywhere near cheap, as the Germans are finding out. The environmental arguments hinge mostly on the impact of less clean energy on climate change which appears to be debatable at best.

[ADK]

Not sure the Germans would agree with that. Though I do agree that cheap, clean energy would be a huge economic boost the problem is that renewables aren't currently anywhere near cheap, as the Germans are finding out. The environmental arguments hinge mostly on the impact of less clean energy on climate change which appears to be debatable at best.

 

I think they are better off being world leaders in an emerging technology than relying on Russian controlled gas pipelines. I think you'll find the local pollution generated by renewables is far less than that of fossil fuel burning, including needing to transport the fuel in from overseas. Things only become cheap when you invest in them.

[MooseBreath]

I think they are better off being world leaders in an emerging technology than relying on Russian controlled gas pipelines. I think you'll find the local pollution generated by renewables is far less than that of fossil fuel burning, including needing to transport the fuel in from overseas. Things only become cheap when you invest in them.

Well the current level of pollution in this country doesn't seem to be doing the people or the environment any harm, so what's the problem?

I agree that renewables need investment so I'm glad that they are getting it in spades from the private sector. No need for any public money to be used yet imo.

[Jon the Hat]

We should be dramatically reducing our energy consumption rather than pissing about with wind farms and the like. 

[Strokes]

We should be dramatically reducing our energy consumption rather than pissing about with wind farms and the like.

This. More efficiently used energy, is the easiest and cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions.

[MooseBreath]

Great story here about a local town really feeling the benefit of the improved economy. Wages up many times the rate of inflation. JSA claimants down to a few tens of people.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31148570

[MooseBreath]

We should be dramatically reducing our energy consumption rather than pissing about with wind farms and the like.

Why? Surely clean sustainable energy is a no brainer as long as it's reasonable value. Cutting consumption rather than increasing renewable production seems a bit like a luddite argument to me.

[Sir Fynwy]

We should be dramatically reducing our energy consumption rather than pissing about with wind farms and the like.

I agree about reducing energy usage and moving to LED lighting in most applications would reduce energy usage but the initial cost barriers are blocking large scale adoption, I looked into getting our properties lighting changed over and the costs were decades worth of electricity used, bulb replacements etc. it means I'll only be replacing broken systems with LED.

I can't see there being a major step change in energy usage soon so we have to look at ways to produce energy more efficiently.

[Rincewind]

There are plans now to sanction IN WORK part time workers. http://www.welfareweekly.com/government-targets-hard-working-benefit-claimants/

Not everyone is able to do full time. They may be at a place that have reduced their hours or a mother with kids at school. Someone has to collect them.

I thought full time employment was supposed to be rising anyway? This action implies that the welfare bill is not being reduced because the number of part time workers has increased.

 

I see that the bill was introduced 'quietly' A political  expression no doubt meaning it received little publicity.

Edited 12 February 2015 by Rincewind

[Benji]

There are plans now to sanction IN WORK part time workers. http://www.welfareweekly.com/government-targets-hard-working-benefit-claimants/

Not everyone is able to do full time. They may be at a place that have reduced their hours or a mother with kids at school. Someone has to collect them.

I thought full time employment was supposed to be rising anyway? This action implies that the welfare bill is not being reduced because the number of part time workers has increased.

 

I see that the bill was introduced 'quietly' A political  expression no doubt meaning it received little publicity.

Presumably you agree with it, though, if it's in the good news thread?

Rather than just be facetious I thought I'd read the article and contribute. Surely it's misleading to use a hardhitting headline about targetting "Hard Working" claimants when the article is about sanctions for people not working 35 hours? Now if there isn't the work out there to do 35 hours that's a different issue altogether, but I'd personally question their definition of what they class as hard working.

Also, I've just clicked on the homepage of that website and I think I'm about ready to hang myself. Do people ever have anything positive to say?

Edited 12 February 2015 by Benji

[Rincewind]

I think you've missed the point. But never mind. I also read it. I also do not assume that anyone on benefits is a scrounger.

Edited 12 February 2015 by Rincewind

[MooseBreath]

Would be more interested if there was a bit more detail. It just says "someone might get sanctioned". Yeah well I might fly to the moon one day, so what?

Edited 12 February 2015 by MooseBreath

[Jon the Hat]

Why? Surely clean sustainable energy is a no brainer as long as it's reasonable value. Cutting consumption rather than increasing renewable production seems a bit like a luddite argument to me.

It isn't reasonable value though is it?

[Benji]

I think you've missed the point. But never mind. I also read it. I also do not assume that anyone on benefits is a scrounger.

Are you implying I do?

The point of the article is a simple one: Government bashing without providing any real detail of what the apparent travesty actually is.

Perhaps answers to the following would make the article something more than just a blatant attempt to stir up public anger (presumably their readership won't fancy paying for a subscription to a "highly profitable" group that runs Inside Housing where the story originates):

* Is it just applying to new Universal Credit applicants and if so, what exactly is being slashed for them if they aren't already on it? Or by slashed do they mean what they "could have got had they been on it earlier"?

* How do they calculate it as a slash on housing benefit if Universal Credit is a consolidated benefit system?

* What does it mean by "failure to comply could result in sanctions"? Are people being asked to pay money back or make certain declarations? Is the deduction not made at source as part of the Universal Credit lump sum calculation?

* Has the journalist asked a representative at the Government for comment? Have they tried to figure out the reasonining behind the change/what is it trying to achieve? Was it always the intention?

You'll have to forgive me for not jumping on bandwagons that don't explain where they're going.

As an aside, the phrase "quietly introduced through secondary legislation" is misleading and a journalistic attempt to stir up grievance at the perceived issue. Secondary legislation is delegated power and therefore its "sexy, in the press, authorising source/primary legislation" will have been scrutinised by organisations like this. A shock it will not be.

Edited 12 February 2015 by Benji

[Harry - LCFC]

Unemployment down by 97,000 in the last month, now at 5.7%.

 

Inflation down to 0.3% although the ONS say a lot of that is due to falling fuel prices as a result of changes we've been seeing in the oil industry.

 

Still, I find it all very convincing.

[MooseBreath]

Some estimates here so take it with as much salt as you think necessary, but 2015 - year of the pay rise.

Unemployment at 40-year-low plus wages rising at nearly 2% against inflation at nearly zero equals a significant rise in wealth and opportunities for anyone who wants to work in this country.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11426576/Why-2015-will-be-the-year-of-the-pay-rise.html

In other news the FTSE100 might hit 7,000 for the first time ever this week, bringing additional wealth to people with pensions and other investments.

[Guest MattP]

Living standards almost back to pre-recession levels.

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/03b68f46-c1be-11e4-bd24-00144feab7de.html#axzz3TPzPaN3W

 

 

Living standards in Britain will finally return to pre-recession levels this year as workers benefit from improvements in the labour market and falling inflation, according to an influential think-tank.

But the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned that real incomes remain about 2 per cent below the level in 2009-10, shortly after the recession began, showing that the recovery in living standards that began in 2011-12 remains slow compared with previous recessions.

The IFS report comes two months before the general election in May, with the Conservatives eager to use the improvements in living standards as evidence that their economic plan is working.

 

Not heard the four words 'Cost of Living Crisis' for a while now - I doubt we'll be hearing it much again.

[Alf Bentley]

Living standards almost back to pre-recession levels.

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/03b68f46-c1be-11e4-bd24-00144feab7de.html#axzz3TPzPaN3W

 

 

Not heard the four words 'Cost of Living Crisis' for a while now - I doubt we'll be hearing it much again.

 

Can't access that FT article, as it's subscription only, but the basic info is the same in all media: 

 

Living standards are back up to pre-recession (2007) levels, but still below 2010 levels: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/04/uk-britain-pay-ifs-idUKKBN0M000T20150304

So, after 5 years of austerity, the Tories have got us back to the level 8 years ago....but not back to the level that the Labour government had got us to within 2 years, in 2010....and this is something to be proud of?!? 

 

In all seriousness, obviously this will be something for the Tories to trumpet from the roof tops during the election to boost their economic credibility, so good news for them....but will people believe politicians or their own experiences?

I'm expecting the latter, which probably means a very divided election result, reflecting a very divided country. I can imagine the Tories piling up votes in prosperous areas to the extent of even winning a few seats off Labour, but suffering large swings against them in areas where living standards are still lagging badly and where there aren't good jobs to be had. As usual, it'll be what the swing voters in the marginals feel that is crucial.

 

About 6 months ago, I remember commenting on here that this election was so close that last-minute "events" could sway the result. Who'd have thought a key "event" might be falling oil prices (the main cause of rising living standards)? 

[MooseBreath]

Would have been a pretty poor show from labour if they weren't able to increase household income while pumping in hundreds of billions worth of QE though, wouldn't it? There was always going to be a bit of a come down after that.

These figures also include, bizarrely, benefit payments, which of course have been reduced and thus had a negative impact upon these income figures. That's an absolutely ridiculous way of measuring the health of an economy, if you ask me. Better just to look at wage growth which is, by all accounts, booming ahead of inflation now.

Edited 4 March 2015 by MooseBreath

[Alf Bentley]

Would have been a pretty poor show from labour if they weren't able to increase household income while pumping in hundreds of billions worth of QE though, wouldn't it? There was always going to be a bit of a come down after that.

These figures also include, bizarrely, benefit payments, which of course have been reduced and thus had a negative impact upon these income figures. That's an absolutely ridiculous way of measuring the health of an economy, if you ask me. Better just to look at wage growth which is, by all accounts, booming ahead of inflation now.

 

Not much of the QE ended up in people's pockets, though. Most of it ended up in the balance sheets of the banks, as I recall.

 

Fair comment (economically, if not socially) re. cuts in benefit payments dragging down income figures. On the other hand, it sounds as if the improvement in incomes has been best for the elderly (via inflation-proofed pensions etc.) and the same criticism could be made of that. I'm busy with work for a change, so haven't had chance to look into it properly, but they seemed to be saying on the news that real incomes have risen less than average for working age people, especially the young, whereas they've risen more than average for the elderly.

 

So, taking from one "unproductive" part of society (people on benefits) and giving to another "unproductive" part of society (pensioners). That comes with electoral benefits, of course, seeing as comparatively few young people vote, while pensioners flock to the ballot boxes - and disproportionately vote Tory.

[MooseBreath]

I think that's an ambitious interpretation. I too haven't seen the detail, but I did see that the "working age" income referred to was for people aged under 30. I'm sure reduced benefits has probably had a significant impact on that group. Not sure what point is trying to be made, if any, but whatever it is, it seems a lot less reliable than plain wage growth figures.

[davieG]

An insurance firm which plans to create more than 200 jobs in Leicester is to move into a city centre tower.

Hastings Direct is setting up a call centre at the Equinox tower, in Burleys Way.

Earlier this month, the company announced it would create 40 jobs in the city centre in May, rising to 230 by the end of the year. It is thought further expansion during 2016 and 2017 could take that figure up to 400.

We reported at the time the company would move into temporary premises to start with before probably relocating to St George's Tower – also known as the Blue Tower – next to Leicester railway station.

 

Now it has emerged Hastings is to set up on the first floor of Equinox – formerly known as Thames Tower.

Reg Pollock, of commercial property agency APB, in Leicester, said London-based property management company Portal had signed a two-year lease for 15,739 sq ft on behalf of Hastings.

He said they had an option to expand this to a further 15,900 sq ft of office space on the second floor.

However, the owner of St George's Tower said it was still in discussions with Hastings about it eventually moving into the huge complex, off St George's Way.

"It's good to see Hastings in the city," said Mr Pollock. "It adds to the recent lettings and interest in the city from companies such as IBM and emphasises the positive story the city has to tell."

Earlier this year, US computer giant IBM announced it was setting up an IT centre in the city centre, creating 300 hi-tech jobs.

Equinox, which comprises 41,000 sq ft of office space, has undergone upgrading work in recent years after investment from London owner Delph Property Group. The 16-storey tower also includes 112 flats.

Recruitment firm Pearson Anderson – currently the only business tenant – employs more than 30 people on the ground floor.

Neither Hastings or Portal would comment.

Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Hastings-Direct-Equinox-tower-Leicester/story-26221558-detail/story.html#ixzz3VImVHHlu 
Follow us: @Leicester_Merc on Twitter | leicestermercury on Facebook

[Harry - LCFC]

Inflation at 0% now. Bit of deflation on the way?

[Guest MattP]

I posted about this guy a few years about what he was getting upto in Tower Hamets but can't find the thread.

 

Probably the best news of the week. Luther Rahman finally exposed and ousted after his years of bullying, corruption and intimidation. First person to be found guilty of this since the 18th century, democracy has to remain sacrosanct to this country and should never be allowed to be trampled upon because people accuse others of phobia's and ism's - I'm so happy this has finally be seen through.

 

I also hope we also now get public apologies from the Trade Unions, Anti Racist Groups and Ken Livingstone who all consistently stood up for this person or financially backed him despite it being widely known what he was getting upto.

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4421032.ece

 

Britain’s first elected Muslim mayor was ousted in disgrace by the High Court yesterday after rigging his election by using religious intimidation to force voters to back him.

Lutfur Rahman faces bankruptcy, being stripped of his profession as a lawyer and the risk of a criminal investigation that could lead to jail, after a judge said that he and his witnesses told a “pack of lies” in court.

 

Among the things he got upto were diverting money from charities to give to Bangladeshi 'community groups' - £100k a time and sometimes even ones that didn't even ask for anything, his election leaflets were asking people to be 'good muslims' and to defend the faith by voting for him, he ran a consistent smear campaign against his Labour party rival on the basis of portraying him as a racist and he even tried to lock out representitives from the Labour and Conservative party from the voting count while people directly related to and employed by him counted the voting slips.

 

It's going to be a big challenge for Britain going forward to tackle the way Islamic identity politics will try to take hold of certain areas of the country, cowering people into obedience under the accusations of Islamophobia and Racism. Despite this judgement these people got away with it for far too long.