Trust the BBC to skip over a massive plot opportuntiy that simply doesn’t activate their own particular predjudices. In a recent episode an undertaker talks to a friend about his efforts to overcome the personal impact of a CPO.

Despite the fact his undertaker’s premises are subject to a compulsory purchase order, Les [is] cheerful – pointing to the boarded up charity shop he tells Pam they’re moving to Turpin Road.

Instead of focusing on this story, in which a rightfully owned property is taken, the plot up to this point had focused on the loss of plots for market stalls by the owners who rented them from the Council. Who’s was the most egregious rights-violation? The undertaker’s story. Who got the focus? The stall-holder tennants.

Wouldn’t it have been nice, rather than seeing the corrupt Ian Beale and the heroic BBC fighting for the rights of tennants on the market, we saw a two sided battle where the Council weighed the arguments against CPOs with the political pressure exerted by the historic square? This would have been an intriging and subtle plot, instead we get a mass-arrival of dime a dozen new characters designed to tick PC boxes, and silly infodumps like the one above.