kevinjohnsonmbe

There's no bigger lobbyist in this area than the NFU! And they don't represent the individual hill farmer but rather the multi-national conglomerate, the landed gentry and big $ NFU London office: Smith Square, Westminster, London SW1 DEFRA address: Nobel House on Smith Square, SW1

Going from memory / news reports, Poole / Dorset must be top of the pops for good prosecutions!

That's not quite an answer, but it's enough for me not to take offence at being accused of being a pant messer!

Prefer to think of myself as part of the 51.9%

Do you mean me when you say 'matey?'

Duly noted Mr E! I will now have to spend some time digging out the references to back it up.... But not tonight or tomorrow, and Thursday Friday are looking unlikely. I know that won't matter because I could leave it a year and you'd pull me up this time 2019! Duly noted Mr E! I will now have to spend some time digging out the references to back it up.... But not tonight or tomorrow, and Thursday Friday are looking unlikely. I know that won't matter because I could leave it a year and you'd pull me up this time 2019! Totally agree regarding the landing cards, they should have been transferred to the national archive (whether in 'e' or fiche form) for the cultural / historical importance alone, notwithstanding that, they also still have reference and relevance to living people. That part is an unmitigated, unjustifiable, inappropriate act of social history vandalism and whoever authorised it should be swinging by the test tackles. Agreed, it shouldn't be beyond the whit of man to work out who's legit, and it shouldn't be beyond the capability of someone that's been here for 50+ years to have popped some paperwork in the post before it got to this stage. 2 way street.

I've often thought this type would be useful, but only if you're clearing leaves! Would have to significantly step up in base weight to be able to carry anything worthwhile. Seem to be more popular on the continent than in UK.

Here's the link to the supporting documents and the ways to submit personal contributions to the consultation on the future for food, farming and the environment, should anyone be interested: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/the-future-for-food-farming-and-the-environment Foreword reproduced for ease in case folks don't want to read the whole package: Foreword Leaving the European Union (EU) provides a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reform agriculture . This paper outlines how we plan to change the way we use the land, so as better to promote health and harmony. For more than forty years, the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has decided how we farm our land, the food we grow and rear and the state of the natural environment . Over that period, the environment has deteriorated, productivity has been held back and public health has been compromised . Now we are leaving the EU we can design a more rational, and sensitive agriculture policy which promotes environmental enhancement, supports profitable food production and contributes to a healthier society . The environmental damage we have suffered while inside the Common Agricultural Policy has been significant. Soil health has deteriorated. Farmland bird numbers have dropped. Precious habitats have been eroded. And at the same time a system of subsidy skewed towards those with the biggest landholdings has kept land prices and rents high, prevented new talent coming into farming and held back innovation Even with those constraints, however, British farmers have been producing high quality food, doing their best to protect the environment and keeping our rural areas economically healthy But government can do more to help. And outside the EU the possibilities for healthy growth are all the greater. The proposals in this paper set out a range of possible paths to a brighter future for farming. They are the beginning of a conversation, not a conclusion and we want everyone who cares about the food we eat and the environment around us to contribute. The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP

What appears to be going unreported Mr E, is that, over the decades, and with governments of differing flavours, at each point where regularisation rules have been upgraded, notices have been issued to all of those that might be adversely effected, in advance of the changes so as to allow them to take appropriate measures. It’s all very well being too laid back to be bothered with admin and hassle, and maybe, rather than national racism, it is the very laid back nature of certain demographics that is at the root of the apparent pay gap, which the passive aggressive “real” racists such as DA, appear to wish to conflate with whatever current cause celeb they are promoting. I wonder if the habitually laid back will be too idle to riot by the end of the rabble rousing and media grand-standing? I’m not registered at the local NHS dentist (out of choice.). Think I’ll go smash the place up for not looking at my ivories....

That could easily be applied across a large portion of the criminal justice system - when does the punishment ever really fit the crime, and when does the fine ever really cover the cost of even bringing it to trial.... Quite rarely I would have thought (unverified sweeping generalisation alert)

I can't fathom the relevance of the picture of the lady in the 4 photo's? It's neither of the Cllr's mentioned in the article... ?

Wouldn't have been acceptable to TCD!!

I've only got 1 example to call upon from about 5-6 years ago where a friend's mother was 'compelled' by a letter from the LA to remove a road-side tree that was deemed to be a hazard to the highway. Note from the pictures the nature of the isolated, single track, very low traffic volume of the road, the evident decay in the stem and that the tree was reduced far beyond that which would have been necessary to remove the perception of a hazard. (I'd have retained a standing stem for ecological / biodiversity value (and to annoy the LA)) even if I didn't like it.... As it happens, the reduction was done by a farmer + telehandler with the son on a pallet in shorts and flip flops with a chainsaw and no TM which very nearly ended in disaster (no exaggeration - but that's by the by.) I had to laugh at the situation where the LA's perception of 'risk of harm' resulted in a set of actions which resulted in (albeit voluntarily) a set of circumstances which by far exceeded the probability of harm than the tree ever did.... ? (Is it 62% by population, land mass or some other measure?? ?)

Maybe a tadge over dramatic, but good to see the prosecutions. If only there were an easily accessible league table of successful LA TPO prosecutions http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/16195544.Millionaire_hacked_down_11_protected_trees_in___39_worst_environmental_crime_of_its_kind_ever_seen_in_Poole__39_/

The party that wants the tree removed would do well to recognise that the tree owner is content for the work to be undertaken. That's often no small achievement and without it - it's staying where it is! If I don't like the colour of your car, and I want you to change it, I'd expect to pay for the body shop and lash you up to a crate of your favourite tipple as a thank you for being so accommodating... The tree condition report sounds like a red herring (unless it is in imminent, immediate and obvious potential of total catastrophic failure. Anything less than that is only as necessary as is required to reduce / remove any parts that do actually present a tangible hazard.) Is it the person that (a) wants the tree down or (b) wants the work of taking the tree down that provided the 'condition report / recommendation?' Ummmmm..... The person that wants the tree down has to make an assessment of how much they want the tree down and is it enough to reach for the wallet....

Could it be a symptom of government (whichever colour / flavour) lacking the moral fibre and being too worried / influenced by media, social media, “so-called” public opinion to take the tough decisions necessary to run a country. You can’t just react to whoever shouts the loudest because to do so is to ignore the quiet majority. Handled very badly, yes. Shot them selves in the foot, yes. Should illegal immigrants (or to soften the language for the delicate) those that have arrived without papers, those that have over-stayed, or those that have broken the law thus invalidating the PRIVILEDGE of visiting bestowed upon them, be removed. Hell yes - white, brown, yellow, pink, Martian, whatever. It’s not a race issue it’s the law of the land. The only sane alternative would be to unilaterally dismantle the entire Customs & Border agency and save ourselves the money and bother of even pretending to try to uphold the law. There shouldnt be a scandal about deportation targets, it should be absolutely clear to everyone: 100% removal of those without legal recourse to be here - or just say Buck it, come all as wish to we’ll sort the infrastructure out afterwards.....

Yes, I’m sure it is still doing the rounds! We went to Minions to see it first time round. The tiny lanes were choked for miles around, had to escape across the moors! Edgecome, Rame peninsula, Kingsand, , Cawsand, Whitsand etc, still all relatively undiscovered gems (although Rame Conservation Trust experiencing some difficulties with development at the moment)

pics....!!

I don't go Norf of the river (Tamar) Gov'nor.... (well, only very rarely and for special occasions!) Scandalous LA behaviour starting to emerge in Nottingham.... Could there possibly be a connection....? http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/DMS/Document.ashx?czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=j0gU%2BCxsgJFDfZgiA7wNt8Wcd%2BCsdVhw1WRm77tka44OAEJ%2F4VnXEQ%3D%3D&rUzwRPf%2BZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3D%3D=pwRE6AGJFLDNlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2FLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3D%3D&mCTIbCubSFfXsDGW9IXnlg%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&kCx1AnS9%2FpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2BAJvYtyA%3D%3D=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&FgPlIEJYlotS%2BYGoBi5olA%3D%3D=NHdURQburHA%3D&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3D If you get so far as reading the link.... The first blatant, corporate speak BS appears in the Exec summary "...Today CORMAC is one of the most highly-regarded, trusted and well-known companies in the South West. We are committed to delivering cost-effective and innovative solutions which add value to our communities, clients, partners and people..." If he honestly thinks that is true, he's never listened to Radio Cornwall phone in show in the afternoon and he's never had a social media account! It also fails to mention in the Exec summary that all of the staff (and inherent idleness and inefficiency of public sector), all of the plant & machinery, all the habitual bad practice transferred direct from CC to Cormac by way of a 5 year loan arrangement on the notional value of equipment transferred, a profit share and RoFR on all CC highways and maintenance works.... Oh, one more thing it forgot to mention, Cormac is 100% share owned by Cornwall council. By any other name - a cartel.

Haven’t seen that before! Brilliant (and spookily similar to some of my LA interactions....)

Especially given the post discussion summary received by email! ”Solved” Well that’s a new definition of “Solved!”

The conversation me and Eggs were having last Tuesday night after a 100 pints made more sense than that! She’s either given the tax payer subsidised bar an all night thrashing or it’s early onset Alzheimer’s....

?