kevinjohnsonmbe

Dammit! Missed your answer! What about Boris + new coal mine? Climate change: Boris Johnson 'risks humiliation' over coal mine WWW.GOOGLE.CO.UK A leading scientist warns Boris Johnson digging for coal undermines the UK's climate change efforts.

Yeah, yeah, weme on the same page there, but is it your Dad in the pic??

Woeful pacifism....

Is that your Dad in the miners' strike Mark? Did you hear that Boris is looking at opening up a coal mine? I'm just tugging ya mate. In all seriousness, in a riot or civil disorder scenario, then 'appropriate' force is entirely lawful and could be defensible. That was a entirely passive geezer handing out loop the loop. If that had been me and plod tried the bracelets, the first one would have had a portion of soup in the token, the second would have had the ladle! Horses for courses 😂

What I find interesting there is the use of cuffs (apart from the blindingly inappropriate arrest of course.) There must be an “objective basis” to justify the use of force. Aspects which might influence that justification are the age, gender, attitude, number of offenders in relation to police numbers etc, etc. The NPCC guidance is here: https://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/FoI publication/Disclosure Logs/Uniformed Operations FOI/2013/003 13 Att 15 of 15 Guidance on the Use of Handcuffs.pdf Ive read it previously because I’ve often thought that, should I ever find myself in similar circumstances, the apparent presumption that handcuffing me (especially if no “objective basis” was apparent) would likely turn me from a laid back, casual pacifist into a demented madman. It’s so wrong that so many people seem to acquiesce with absolutely no protest.

Better without the hippo you trophy hunting murderererer!

The combined centuries of wisdom and experience, tested by the inquisitive open mindedness of ‘fresh eyes’ on the forum make for some serious checks and balances.

I may have misinterpreted your point Bob. I guess an employer / prime contractor can specify the means or technique employees must adopt in the exercise of their duties - esp if those techniques read through the relevant RAs. Different if an employer had prior knowledge of a potentially non compliant practice and sought to absolve them self of responsibility through a disclaimer. That wouldn’t be kosher.

That’s a can of worms.... Company recognises employees may be deviating from procedure but offers them an opportunity to formalise and record the deviation at their own risk. It’d be like signing a pre-emptive admission of failure to manage H&SaW and providing HSE a free pass to prosecution 🤯

Saw the vid the day before it went viral K just waiting on Matt Frei to interview the boot on LBC

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

I rear ended a car today.... Other driver got out for a row, imagine my surprise when I saw he was a dwarf! He said, "...I'm not Happy..." I asked, "...Well which one are you then...?" That's when the fight started 😂

Paul, mate, it's OK. I genuinely laughed when reading that - in a good humoured way. I know you're bound by corporate etiquette - a yolk I cast off many years ago and much the happier for it - I was never much for sugar coating anyway. Despite having spread my wings and freed myself from toeing the party line, the corporate speak thesaurus is still on the shelf and often referred to. Never in the history of humankind has a sentence or a dialogue ever opened with the phrase "respectfully" which didn't actually mean "right you cvnt , you're talking bullox, you're full of shite and I'm gonna set you right." It's just the way it is.... 😂 The effort is appreciated but the actual meaning is well known - and I don't mind at all. I'd agree though, it probably is a damning statement - but also it is as accurate and succinct a way of expressing my personal feeling on the subject as came to mind at the time. It's become de rigueur to challenge a position by asking for an evidenced based rationale - in many cases, rightly so. In this case it is like asking me to prove something that I don't believe has happened - impossible. What is possible is to reference the literally 1000s of adverse comments across numerous similar threads, predominantly from experienced and professional practitioners, which present a fairly unified criticism of the HSE driven imposition of what generally appears to be an illogical retro-step. It should however be possible to evidence the arb industry accident based analysis which provides the unequivocal data to support this fundamental policy / training / practice change. I'm not sure we even have the means to collect the accurate data let alone analyse it in such a way as to derive credible need for activity changes. You can't beat a bit of illogical bandwagoning 😂. Just ask Boris! I recall quite clearly the AAAC workshop all those years ago in the depths of Cornwall - you quite clearly articulated the AA position that MEWP should be default and climbing only where MEWP physically couldn't be brought to site. Cost nor time nor inconvenience were valid reasons for not MEWPing and climbing was only acceptable in the risk hierarchy where MEWP was not possible due to access etc. I got the point of that but I always felt it lacked a 'real world' (domestic arb) credibility. Then we had that dreadful incident where the MEWP was firmly ensconced in the RA (it was in a park or something - can't rightly remember) and the blind obedience to pre-established RA procedure actually resulted in the site conditions not being properly considered, the MEWP was set up incorrectly and over it went. I can't rightly remember the exact details but it struck me then that the weak point was neither the system nor the equipment but rather the operators willingness to just follow laid down procedure rather than actually DO a dynamic assessment. That remains my personal concern for 'systems' to be given greater priority than proper checks, operator knowledge and experience. All that said, I'd love a tracked MEWP and have been saving accordingly - but that is mostly because I'm old and increasingly idle 😂

You’ll hardly generate an economic revival by purchasing new ladders, a squeegee and a bucket 😂

Yup, a ‘problem’ that cannot even be properly quantified and exampled has been ‘solved’ with a ‘solution’ which can be quantified and exampled, in many cases, to have made matters worse. Great job.... 👍🏻

As you’ll know K, there really is an active margin that seek such scenarios in Kernow as well as the better known. What with all the constant whining, even though I think it’s madness, at some point (when it hits a majority) the ‘people’ should be given what they ask for.

I know what my reaction would be!

Etched in my sub conscious is the ignominy of being thrown out of the Oggies Field Gun crew dinner after ‘assaulting the stripper with a friendly weapon!’ In my defence, it was HER friendly weapon which she handed to me.... I guess she wasn’t quite prepared for its deployment 🤷🏻‍♂️ Off I went, on my Tod, down Union Street dressed as a Hawaiian complete with flower Garland, coconut bra and grass skirt to await the arrival of the rest of the fancy dress crew. A few harrowing moments in solitary until the rest of the pack ponied up!

Typical army mess dinner Mr C! 😂

Brilliant!

Soundtrack made that worth watching! And the pole through the truck cab!!

That could be seen as a positive action by all SMEs that are already VAT registered since it would drive down the number of non-VAT reg companies that are able to under price VAT reg companies by 20%. Make no difference to the pricing or profit, just means customers would have less access to non VAT reg service suppliers. Not so good for the customer perhaps.

It's certainly been on the cards. Worrying if he sets out to additionally penalise those that were, in the large part, least 'supported' by the various bale outs. Have you seen / heard a specific reference to anticipated claw back strategies or is it just a general feeling? Been out all day so haven't heard any of the latest news and opinions.

Not yet, shame really...

I’m minded to agree.... But I’d also point out that the premise of the question, whilst an interesting and timely one, is inherently flawed and therefore guaranteed to return a flawed data set. Example - there’s no option for entering a response where the last tree you climbed involved no ropes or TiPs at all... 🙉