kevinjohnsonmbe

I'd heard the term used, and had an idea of the probable meaning, but thought I'd better check: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snow+flake+generation 🤔😳😁😂

When did politics fall to the abysmal standard by which football managers are judged and tried by media? Lose 1 game, get the sack because everyone at home is an armchair expert. Good on you PM, you stand fast and rise above it...

Damian Green made First Secretary of State (Deputy PM by any other name) Steady hands... Damian Green made First Secretary of State in reshuffle - ITV News

Gove takes on Environment Secretary brief.... Cabinet reshuffle: Michael Gove returns to Cabinet as Environment Secretary | The Independent Interesting... He was too clever for Education brief, forgot that a fundamental part of leadership is taking the team with you. Some, but not enough, progress with Justice department, complete balls up with Brexit campaign turning on Uncle Boris.... I wonder how he'll manage the Environment brief? I hope for a business like dollop of bloody good sense but fear I'm going to be underwhelmed....

Mod 3: If you pay INCOME tax, or are employed but fall below the tax threshold, (currently higher under a Tory administration than at any time previous ) you get to vote - excluding students that still believe in the tooth fairy... (Unless it's a Tory voting student, then that would be OK.)

With the confidence of hindsight, that scenario you describe Gary, you "could" have just done it without even informing / applying to the LA - actionable nuisance trumps TPO. Obviously, having taken the route (😁) you did resulted in a successful appeal so it's easier to say, with that knowledge, that you could have just cracked on without submitting an app. Did this route result in additional cost to the customer? Did LA then seek to impose re-planting condition??

Mod 2: If you pay tax, or are employed but fall below the tax threshold, (currently higher under a Tory administration than at any time previous ) you get to vote - excluding students that still believe in the tooth fairy... (Unless it's a Tory voting student, then that would be OK.)

There it is! Thanks Mr E!! Mod 1: If you pay tax, or are employed but fall below the tax threshold, (currently higher under a Tory administration than at any time previous ) you get to vote. That would seems to be a fairly simple and inherently fair system to me. (awaiting Mod 2)

If you pay tax you get to vote. That would seems to be a fairly simple and inherently fair system to me. I'm sure there must be some obvious reason why that wouldn't work, but can't think of it at the moment...

Noting the case by case caveat and balancing act requirement, and jumping from theory to practical, I'm struggling to think of a scenario where a "less mischievous" means might be less expensive than a "more mischievous" means. Less mischievous - ground penetrating radar, maybe hand excavation / airspade, sympathetically realign existing roots away from area of encroachment... (if that's even feasible) More mischievous - backhoe trench, straight line root severance... Unless we are considering the "whole package" potential costs which might necessarily include resultant legal / recompense for damages costs? I'm not arguing just for the sake of it (for a change), just couldn't immediately bring to mind a scenario where less mischievous might be cheaper than more mischievous.

Great speaker! Even better concept!! Why are we so obsessed with "growth" and seem to take no interest in "reduction" and sustainability? Even the UK Greens have their head up their own backsides on this. Population expansion is the greatest threat to sustainability.

Hope so!!

Trouble can arise where "less mischievous" is more expensive... 🤔

Can't find the original post that linked to this: http://www.mod-sales.com/direct/vehicles/,129,/Event_+_Expedition_Vehicles.htm But here it is featured in LRO July issue with a 4 page spread! What an outfit. Built 3 years ago by Supercat for the RN as an all terrain carrier vehicle and work shop for submarine drones. Snapped up by Withams (for a song no doubt) 3 years after manufacture. I'd hazard a guess it carried a staggering price tag and that it's never seen mud and barely even been used. If this is not a scandalous example of waste and stupidity in defence procurement I'll eat my Hilux!! I feel a letter to our newly elected MP brewing!

What about Yerself?

Can't totally fathom the recent outrage about a Tory / DUP alliance although I do acknowledge it may not prove to be an easy road to travel. On the one hand: * notwithstanding the NI "issues" which are probably best understood by NI residents. * the pending results of the "burn to earn" enquiry. * noting the possible destabilising effect on the devolved power of NI of appearing to favour one side of that entrenched situation more than the other. * and the issues that may give rise to... ...the DUP, just like SF, are the democratically elected representatives of the people of the North of Ireland and have held seats in the mother of all parliaments for some years. If the presence of the DUP, or SF, as democratically elected representatives, is so repugnant why have we not had an equal number of years of outraged protest as the number of years each part has been elected? Why is it only upon the creation of a Tory / DUP alliance that we are suddenly hearing all these outraged voices aligned against the previously openly stated policy positions of the DUP? Where were these outraged voices before? Nowhere that's where, which says to me it's the last gasp of spoilt, petulant career protestors desperately looking for a cause to hang their hat on. If it's an outrage (that the DUP are in parliament) today, then it was an outrage yesterday as sure as night follows day. But there was no protest yesterday, nothing, nada, squat! If you didn't have the hump yesterday, why do you think you should today?

Totally agree. Nobody talked about hard or soft DURING the Brexit campaign. The phraseology was introduced AFTERWARDS by butt hurt Remoaners. And it won't be a UK government that drives us towards hard or soft, regardless of the flavour of the government that is in the driving seat (I'm not suggesting it won't be Blue, but crazier things have happened.) It will be the EU that dictates the terms upon which they are willing to advance, the UK government will have the option to either accept or reject those terms. For my part, I can't foresee anything other than a ridiculous set of prerequisite terms from the EU which will, inevitably, be unacceptable to the UK. We've had a vote, we said FU EU but we're willing to stay friends if you want, over to you. Quite right Mark. Areas of historic legacy of hard working manual labour and heavy industry combined with areas of high density, predominantly immigrant population = Red. Everything else = Blue. Scotland being a bit of an oddball but that's for a different thread!!

:thumbup1:

It's been a long while since we've had a VI verse!! There must be material in the recent events??

Alright, we need a new topic! How can a sensible person believe that the Brexit team were in any way authorised to commit future government spending? It defies logic but..... Serves a useful purpose. I would concede that it was a very poorly conceived ad. I would conceded that there may have been an attempt to give an impression that additional money could be allocated to the NHS. I can't believe anyone actually believed Brexit = £350 mill additional funding into the NHS.

Connected yes.... The message was: There will be money that we are not sending to Bruxelles which we might better spend in the UK. The assumption that ALL of it would unilaterally be pumped into a single department is beyond naive but has served a useful purpose. The genius that decided it was a good idea to put the 2 parts of the message together on one bus, thereby attempting to steal some sympathy from the great British public's unhealthy (ha, ha) obsession with all things NHS has resulted in this very useful beating stick.

Returning ADR, and doffing cap guv'nor, but, if you can find me a verbal quote of a major player in the Brexit camp stating that 350 mil will go directly into the NHS..... See, I don't think it is splitting hairs, I think it was/is blatant opportunism and misrepresentation by the remain camp. (That'll be Youtube crashing under the weight of traffic then...)

It will never change until we start (a) confirming which 3rd party logistics provider a retailer uses before making the purchase and (b) naming and shaming the retailers that engage inadequate carriers. Retailers can have the very best customer service possible, and they very often do, but the whole experience can, and very often does, go horribly wrong in the final mile. I share your rage!

I didn't see the famous bus first hand Felix. But I have seen the pictures. None of the pictures I saw of the bus demonstrated that there would be £350 mil/week for the NHS. That urban myth has been perpetuated by the Bremoaners as a mantle to justify the continued whining. The bus said (according to the pictures I've seen) "We send the EU £350 million per week" Next line "Lets fund our NHS instead" That's some way from "We send the EU £350 million per week" "Lets put £350 millions per week into the NHS." That's not lost on you, I am 100% confidant on that....