kevinjohnsonmbe

Maybe membership of the Parliamentary Ornamental Horticulture Group was, in part, a reason for the apparent inability to challenge the HSE 2 rope working fiasco? Could you: (a) reference a non generic Gov document which says stay at home unless absolutely necessary - maybe something more arb related rather than a mantra for the metropolitan general public? (b) acknowledge that, in the absence of any current Gov support for the self employed that the income generated from the task, rather than the interpretation of necessity of the task, is what actually defines absolutely necessary. (c) acknowledge that current Gov guidance actually states work which absolutely cannot be done from home IS an exempted activity in line with current (19:42 24 Mar 20) Gov guidance (below.) (d) consider the potential for the AA to move from the Ornamental Horticulture Group to something with a bit more relevance for the sake of the industry?

Yup, just checked a few minutes ago. The 2 Beech trees I have to take down tomorrow 'absolutely' cannot be done from home and I am ABSOLUTELY looking forward to a day in the harness to get away from all this hassle.

If you hadn’t minced off out of country I probably could have lashed you up for a few days as a brash monkey ? Might keep the wolf from the door ? I do recall being stranded in Tromso for 2 months back in 2001 After we ran aground though - definitely worse places to get stuck! Beautiful women ?

Option 1: Single person per vehicle, stays local, lots of distance between co-workers, lots of air circulation, self employed gets paid for being at work, doesn’t get paid if don’t go to work. Option 2: Takes a plane to another country mixing in close proximity with untold numbers of people, breathing re-circ air, potentially spreads infection across international borders (assumption) is employed so gets paid anyway..... Just for the record mucker, which option did you choose?

Contact Forestry Commission field agent for your area. Our offices WWW.FORESTRYENGLAND.UK You can contact local districts directly if you have a complaint, please use the contacts below. If you’d like to know how...

Christ - that’s a ball ache!

So far as I can find, there appears to be no restriction on PD rights regardless of the proximity of trees - unless pre-existing CA/TPO/FL/Nat parks etc restrictions apply - or am I just not looking in the right place? Nothing in Mynors & no joy with a quick on line search. This particular scenario is a historic situation. Garage built amongst existing mature trees under PD 10-12 yrs ago, advice was (apparently) sought from LA and homeowner told no planning app was required. I haven’t seen that corro yet. Is this apparent deficiency still the case under current PD regs? Perhaps it was a procedural oversight by LA in this instance? Anyone got a link to PD guidance that requires an AIA if trees are in dev footprint or any references that might be useful??

Totally agree! It should however come with a mandated return of service or an obligation for reimbursement of training costs.

There’s always an exception to the rule K ? Its for those that were responsible to take responsibility.

Fair! On the bright side, it’s good to see people thinking and voicing independent thought rather than being led by the nose from the many layers of retarded officialdom. There’s a simple principle to follow and it is enshrined in our history. Do no harm to others.

If someone wants to espouse an opinion that continuing to work, where that work can be undertaken without compromising current guidance, is inappropriate I’d invite them to post a picture of their next shopping trolley. If it contains only the essential food groups - no biscuits, no booze, no luxury items for example - I’ll put them on a list entitled “not talking out of their ass.” Anyone going into the acknowledged higher risk environment of supermarket shopping, and buying anything additional to basic, essential food groups and suggesting I can’t work alone on the moors will be on the “other” list.

Nice one ??????

Not fact checked but looks kosher and sounds like the direction of travel:

Is that Ian????

Gove & Khan “adding clarity” on TV this morning.... ?

Cummings must be reading Arbtalk!

I think this a first, hopefully a last, seriously? Take a minute to think just how ridiculously hypocritical your recent posts have been. Yome pumping some Olympic grade shite tonight fella.

That’s what he said and it is clear enough in the doc

That’s not what he said but if the extract of a dotgov page above is genuine, he didn’t properly / wholly relay the full message in his speech. I listened very carefully to what he said. Travel to work if you can’t work at home. I was planning to continue my work, where appropriate, in splendid isolation.

We had similar letter referencing the government guidance and stating that both parents should be key workers. You won’t be surprised that I did read the gov guidance. There is NO mention of both parents needing to be key workers. It seems to me to be an ‘interpretation’ by our schools trust (which is a business after all) in order to minimise demand. I haven’t got a hairy shirt on about it just yet but that is exactly the sort of unilateral interpretation of very clear published strategic guidance by piss-ant bureaucrats that boils my piss. It also has the very real potential to create a barrier to key workers delivering key roles because top level directives are being mis-applied by morons.

Mild national hysteria, hoarding and potential lock-down aside Al, all good this end ? Little un's first day of not going to school today. Mrs is on critical workers list (I'm more on the idle bastards list) we could sent her into school if we needed to, but not yet, it's manageable. As a mate who's Mrs is a rozzer (and their daughter is in our little un's class) said "...those that are in school are the children of folks that are public facing, maybe not the best idea..." C19 aside, my biggest worry bead at the moment is trying to get as much as possible done if / before we hit a lock-down situation. Have to admit, the potential is frustrating. I can understand the need for it where folks are ramming themselves into underground train carriages or bumbling around without a care in the world, but I rarely see anyone from one day to the next so what 'works' in London is a massive overkill for the likes of many rural arb and forestry types. Take it easy brother ??

Crikes, hope things work out OK Mr C.

An organisation with >50,000 staff members on £100k or higher salaries bleating about lack of resources.... Now there’s a genuinely absurd situation. 50,137 NHS staff on £100,000 or more WWW.TAXPAYERSALLIANCE.COM Nobody disagrees with paying doctors and nurses well for doing good, difficult jobs. But the NHS Rich List makes clear...