Steven P

Jees!! How on earth do you think we got Covid in the first place? Like the plague of 1665, it came over the Chanel on boats. Do keep up.

We did, wasn't happening. 'secular' isn't going to make some choke into their cornflakes as much as 'Muslim' would for a post first thing in the morning, far more amusing.

Weird... because they are exposed to all in general schools. Try getting a Catholic school to accept a Muslim child and cater for their specific needs - same as getting a Muslim school to do the same for a Catholic

Didn't we work out last week that the vast majority of immigration to the UK is 'legal' and outnumbers the 'illegal' ones by about 8 times. If you are really really worried about immigration why so quiet about these numbers? Cut the legal entrants by about 300,000 and boom job done! no housing problem, wages will increase as farmers desperate to pick crops will pay more, their countries will improve without a brain drain, every one is a winner

Finally realising that you are missing the point with those that cross the channel in small boats then.... They are the desperate with nothing to go home to, persecution by the regime and here to claim asylum. They do however make nice photos for Nigel Farage and the Daily Mail. Cannot make such nice photos of immigrants arriving through Heathrow Airport, looking like you or me returning from our summer holidays. That wouldn't be a sensational story would it. These migrants (550,000 of them) are the economic migrants, here for the jobs and money rather than here avoid being tortured and killed,. Asylum seeker probably can't be controlled, if you are that desperate you will get here anyway, but the economic migration.. directly controlled by government policies. Noting the conflicting stories in the press in the last few years "young men coming here on boats" and "crops left in fields to rot because of labour shortages". Daily mail has no shame in its contradictions.

Small boats in the channel before Brexit: Small Boats in the channel after Brexit: You do the reading, it might blow your mind.... A thriving industry now, a real tory success story that.

en-suites which to be fair are unnecessary add to the footprint of the house, which adds to the environmental impact. Not sure I want to piss in a cupboard in the bed room but that is just me. Referring to the report in question, the more we pave over near rivers, the more rain washes straight in without soaking through the soil. A contributing factor to flooding but also washing any pollutants straight off the property and into the watercourse, for example grass feeds and weed killers, but also dog and cat poo, which the builders had to account for in the past. You'll probably say that this is a small factor but,,, every little helps and with the manifesto target of 300,000 new homes a year (see link below) that is a lot of little bits of pollution. Thought that was at least fairly clear, New homes: What's happened to the government's housebuilding target? WWW.BBC.CO.UK Michael Gove failed to commit to the government's new-homes target, so what's happening to it?

Exactly the point we are making, something like 90% of the 'illegal' migrants are granted refugee status - they have a valid and legal claim to be given refuge from the countries they came from - and when they are, these 17,000 single men do not want executive houses, they will need smaller properties more suited to a lower wage..... which is exactly the point I am making. What is being built is not what we need

Mentioned above that population trends are more single person households, and a population predicted to fall in the next 20 to 30 years. Young people are the ones who cannot find a suitably priced house to buy. The housing we need are not executive houses, 5 bedrooms and 6 bathrooms, but smaller 1 or 2 person flats that are affordable for young people to but, and cheaper to run than taking 90% of a 25 year olds salary. Don't need to be ripping up all the spare green space, but to replace, refurbish, upgrade the towns that we have - there is enough brownfield sites to do this.... however brownfield sites cost more to develop which the big political backers don't like, far cheaper to give an annual £11 million bung and rip up the countryside, join u pall the towns so we don't see any green on our commutes. I think you missed sime42s point being more worried with semantics rather than understanding what he was actually saying - fewer en-suits, home cinemas, garages, all come down to smaller houses (more flats for single occupancy, and terraces)(which is what the housing need actually is), built where we have previously built and to allow more green stuff to grow. Semantics... but you are focussing on toilets rather than what he actually means. Flooding for example is increased the more we pave over, build on and mess with flood plains (next to rivers as in the article for example) Edit... If you think that the way to go is executive houses, would you be prepared to pay your young staff enough to afford a £1k+ monthly mortgage? -EDIT = just checked the new house prices around me, make that £2500 a month for the mortgage

However... don't need 5 bedrooms, 6 toilets and 5 car spaces next to a leafy riverside setting. Larger than average flat, 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, car parking round the back and a few communal visitors spots, that would do me

The predictions are that in Scotland the population will decrease in the mid 2030s, about 10 years time, and in England 2045 to 2050 the prediction is a declining population. Population growth at the moment is fuelled by immigration, which if the Torys ever get their way will be stopped within a few weeks. No problem building houses, I think the article is more to do with relaxing the environmental standards then the numbers of houses being built. Perhaps however we don't need to build houses so close to rivers for this to be a problem (I always thought that a house near a river is a flood risk? Maybe I am wrong). Personal view here is that instead of ripping up all the green spaces, pave paradise and put up a parking lot, that the existing housing stock should be replaced and refurbished... but this is too expensive for those that make big political donations..... The young, those that struggle to get on the housing ladder don't necessarily need an executive home, 3 car drive, a double garage and more toilets than bedrooms. To get the young on the housing ladder they want smaller places - flats maybe - near stuff rather than lifeless estates filled with executives and BMWs

this link is a few years old but I am sure £11 million 3 years ago (and the rest before and since) has nothing to do with this then? Exclusive: Property tycoons gave Tories more than £11m in less than a year WWW.OPENDEMOCRACY.NET Conservatives accused of being ‘in hock’ to developers as donations from property and construction soars amid ‘cash for access’ accusations against housing secretary Robert Jenrick. ..looking forward to the day when I don't see a tree on my commute, just flats, sorry apartments

Might have a look on Google maps? Google earth does an old map function (not the internet browser version) - my area has a couple of maps from 1930s, which might give a clue? I wonder, the white house in the background - is that a similar age to the terrace? Where the car park has had some of the wall removed. I might guess a pedestrian gateway to a posh house in the street? Carriage gate was removed with more of the wall? Just a guess for now, but don't know if there is anything built behind that door

The idea is the same, a stick to one side of the saw?

Classic line on the news the UK's security services "thought that it was shot down on purpose"... no shit!

Falling out of the plane window mid air?

a bit of a slow burner but worth it.

Heretic!! Are you suggesting that there is some sort of common ground between some religions? Not sure if you are quite mad or just plain off the wall.

I'd go the other way, bring them out and if they cause a disturbance back into a solitary cell..... for as long as it takes, and if they miss a meal time, bed time, wake up call then so be it. Reading court reports Judges have a way of telling the guilty what and why, where the solicitor, paid by the guilty, might not put it quite so blunt.

If I popped over to your house to celebrate your birthday, that would not make me your brother.

That's what I think.. which is what the question is about isn't it.....

Might be if you met her face to face you'd say she's not the type to be a mass murderer either.

Yes, they should be there to be told face to face what the punishment is. From above, they can rant, rave, shout all they like, the viewing gallery can do the same, but if they do clear the court, take the guilty back to the holding cell till all is calm, bring them back and then tell them. Clear and concise, the punishment and why they are getting that punishment. Capital punishment? No. If their crimes are so bad, let them sit out their days in jail, in the knowledge that they will eventually die alone.

Feed a troll and they get hungry for more. Ban him and we loose any pearls of wisdom, react and he will write more rubbish. So just don't react,

Maybe a Sunday afternoon thing, too far from Friday and not close enough to Monday to get wound up. The thread worked but like a lot of attention seekers, trolls, or whatever you want to call them, keep feeding them attention and they will keep coming back for more. Valid posts and comments for sure, but those that are written just to be controversial and to feed a need perhaps don't need a reply?