In my twenty years of experiencing housing market dysfunction in the UK - and having heard every excuse under the sun, from evil landlords, to greedy foreigners, to lazy councils, to selfish nimbys - the essential issue is that Britain doesn’t zone enough space for housing.
Such zones do not need to be new land area. They could, and in the main should, be “up”, as Auckland has done successfully in the last several years.
But we need to mandate zoning and area plans for every local authority, and strong design codes as well.
And then after that, we need the planning system to let people get on with it, instead of strangling them with a thousand petty rules and a thousand opportunities for people object.
"They could, and in the main should, be “up”,"
A significant issue is that the British 'dream' is not a flat in a tall tower block. It is a detached or semi-detached house with garage and a garden. Hence that is what builders try to build, squeezing as many such houses onto as small a plot as possible.
It is a situation made worse by the tower block disasters of the 1960s and 1970s, reinforced by Grenfell and access to gardens during Covid lockdowns.
Perhaps this should change; but good luck with that.
Its not an issue. If that's what people want, that's what they should get.
Let those who want to live in tower blocks or apartments do so. If people want a home with a garden then they should have one.
Though you can have a home with a garden that is still building up. My house is a three bed semi that takes no more space than my grandparents 1 bed bungalow, because its built over 2 stories. Some people like 3 stories now too.
An update on the story of one of the journalists / activist murdered a few weeks ago....
The family of Robert Davis, 19, who is accused of killing local journalist Josh Kruger, said that Davis was just 15 when he and Kruger began a years-long relationship involving drugs — and that Davis told them Kruger was threatening to post sexually explicit videos of him online before, police say, Davis shot Kruger.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Really like the one near me. Keeps me updated how long I have got left, very easy to use. The problem is the proliferation of them, not the app per se.
If there was one app to rule them all, I might agree (but there should be alternative options - cash - for anyone without a smartphone, or whose phone has run out). But there isn't one app.
Incidentally, near me there has been the following hilarity: different sections of what may (IMV) reasonably appear to be the same car park, run by different companies.
"Drivers left confused after being hit with parking fines at St Neots car park despite buying ticket"
I am old enough to remember when Israel was being pressed to give up land for peace. Well it did that in Gaza. It gave up land. It removed the settlers. And what it got in return was Hamas and rockets and now massacres.
Israel has made many mistakes over the years. Netanyahu is unquestionably the wrong leader for it, especially at such a time. I fear that an invasion of Gaza now will be a strategic error and lead to all sorts of casualties for the innocent.
But the Palestinians have consistently made huge errors, the biggest one of all being their refusal to accept Israel's right to exist. Hamas seeks the elimination of Israel and the killing of every Jew everywhere - not just in Israel. This is explicitly genocidal. There is no negotiation with such a movement. Eliminating it is the only answer. Just as we sought to eliminate Nazism and ISIS and other similar genocidal movements.
Those who worry about what happens next need to provide an alternative to Israel, one that will not make that country prey to genocidal maniacs. Lots of people are willing to speak hard truths to Israel about obeying the laws of war and civilian deaths and the rest of it. Very few are telling Hamas that it is their genocidal ideology which has brought Gaza to the point it is, that it is their deliberate policy of hiding amongst civilians which is putting Palestinians at risk, it is their refusal to accept Israel's right to exist which means there is not the remotest hope of starting any peace talks.
There is plenty of pressure which needs putting on Israel but Hamas must first be eliminated. It cannot - until it changes what it wants - be a player. It has taken itself outside the universe of civilised decency. So if invasion of Gaza is not the solution, what is? And if we don't have an alternative solution, then we can hardly be surprised if Israel does what it thinks necessary to save itself. What would we do were we in their position?
I sometimes feel that commentators are unwilling to provide or even begin to think about what an alternative might be because - after all the condemnations of Hamas - they give up at expecting anything better from the Palestinians and it is, after all, so much easier and more comfortable to revert to criticising Israel.
I was saying something similar the other day. Gaza allows itself to be ruled by Hamas. It does this in the knowledge that Hamas is committed to the death of all Jews. The murderous assaults came from their territory and seem to have been a source of glee.
I fully get that the residents of Gaza have a terrible life, that they are economically repressed by Israel and made to beg for water and electricity. Israel’s policies have been unenlightened at best and self harming all too often. If I lived in Gaza I would hate the Israeli government and want to resist that oppression.
But if you want to be listened to, if you want things to change, you do not start with the beheading of babies because they are Jews.
It is 17 years since there was an election in Gaza. 17 years during which Hamas has done it's best to kill anyone who actively opposes them. The Palestinians there 'allow' themselves to be ruled by Hamas about as much as the inhabitants of Kabul 'allow' themselves to be ruled by the Taliban.
So send the military in to liberate the populace and destroy Hamas.
2 birds, one stone.
If they were willing to do it in a way that we generally tried to in Afghanistan then I would agree all the way. But they won't. They are simply flattening the place with no regard for Palestinian casualties.
Its war, that happens. They need to flatten the places which Hamas are using.
There are no easy or peaceful solutions in warfare.
Safe refuge out of Gaza should be allowed for those who don't want to be fighting, many towns or cities have lost 95% of their population in Eastern Ukraine, no reason that won't or shouldn't happen in Gaza City too.
The civilians in Eastern Ukraine were allowed to leave. The civilians in Gaza are not.
But interesting that you are now (inadvetently) comparing the what is being done to the Palestinians with what was done to the Ukrainians.
I've made the comparison repeatedly.
Hamas = Russia Ukraine = Israel
Only difference is that Israel has the strength to take the fight onto the invaders territory rather than being forced to have it on their own.
That's not a bad thing, the situations are parallel rather than identical.
That is no excuse for killing civilians no matter how much you might want to. Neither Russia nor Hamas are civilised democratic entities. Israel is supposed to be. Hopefully they will remember that.
There is no excuse for deliberately killing civilians.
Killing civilians who are caught in the crossfire while you are acting in a way proportional to the objective is regrettable but acceptable.
The destruction of Hamas has to be the objective.
And Hamas are embedded in the civilian population. Hamas live there, have arms there, launch missiles there. The slaughter of the civilians of Gaza is explicitly *what Hamas want*.
I do not expect to hear reports of the IDF summarily torturing / mutilating / executing women and children. That kind of depravity isn't just a war crime, it is evil and inhuman. But sadly innocent women and children are being killed in Gaza. And I mourn them as well.
So the calls to open up a humanitarian corridor out of Gaza are right and just. Because the IDF are coming, they have to do what they are to do. There are no other options.
Re corridors - I have yet to hear anyone say where the refugees will go.
It wont be Israel obviously
Bar a handful of lucky folk ( eg Humza Yousafs rellies ) I cant see it being Europe as Europe is already saying it has enough on its hands
Half the arab world is out because its a mess - Libya, Syria, Iraq Lebanon Yemen
And the other half doesnt want the palestinians since they have been difficult citizens
I cant even see the West bank wanting many because of the Hamas\PLO emnity
So where ? Russia, Iran, North Korea ?
Until this is solved calls for corridors mean little.
It should be countries that support Hamas/Palestine, so Iran etc
West Bank has to be out of the question, there's no point getting them out of one part only for them to turn back up in another, Israel would need to do the same to the West Bank if that's where they go.
I suspect one reason Lisa Cameron might not have defected to Labour is because they already have a candidate for East Kilbride Michael Shanks MP @mgshanks We’ve all said it, here’s the proof. Vote SNP, get Tory.
But soon East Kilbride will have the chance to vote for real change with a Labour Government and a brilliant MP in @JoaniReid .
In my twenty years of experiencing housing market dysfunction in the UK - and having heard every excuse under the sun, from evil landlords, to greedy foreigners, to lazy councils, to selfish nimbys - the essential issue is that Britain doesn’t zone enough space for housing.
Such zones do not need to be new land area. They could, and in the main should, be “up”, as Auckland has done successfully in the last several years.
But we need to mandate zoning and area plans for every local authority, and strong design codes as well.
And then after that, we need the planning system to let people get on with it, instead of strangling them with a thousand petty rules and a thousand opportunities for people object.
"They could, and in the main should, be “up”,"
A significant issue is that the British 'dream' is not a flat in a tall tower block. It is a detached or semi-detached house with garage and a garden. Hence that is what builders try to build, squeezing as many such houses onto as small a plot as possible.
It is a situation made worse by the tower block disasters of the 1960s and 1970s, reinforced by Grenfell and access to gardens during Covid lockdowns.
Perhaps this should change; but good luck with that.
Its not an issue. If that's what people want, that's what they should get.
Let those who want to live in tower blocks or apartments do so. If people want a home with a garden then they should have one.
Though you can have a home with a garden that is still building up. My house is a three bed semi that takes no more space than my grandparents 1 bed bungalow, because its built over 2 stories. Some people like 3 stories now too.
I lie in a three-storey townhouse. It's okay, but not ideal with a baby/toddler.
But it's still possible to live in a three-story townhouse and have a (tiny) garden and garage. As I, and my neighbours, have.
I totally agree. Those who want to live in a flat should ideally have the option. The problem - which was the point of my post - is that too few people do. The dream is for a starter home to be a nice detached (or, at a push, semi) on a pleasant cul-de-sac, with garage and garden.
Until that 'dream' alters, we'll have these problems with flats.
Any particular reason? Two US Navy carrier groups not up to the job?
Sunak channeling his Churchill . When does he give his speech from the no 10 lectern ? The USA has loads of military assets to help . Why does the UK need to send ships .
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
I am old enough to remember when Israel was being pressed to give up land for peace. Well it did that in Gaza. It gave up land. It removed the settlers. And what it got in return was Hamas and rockets and now massacres.
Israel has made many mistakes over the years. Netanyahu is unquestionably the wrong leader for it, especially at such a time. I fear that an invasion of Gaza now will be a strategic error and lead to all sorts of casualties for the innocent.
But the Palestinians have consistently made huge errors, the biggest one of all being their refusal to accept Israel's right to exist. Hamas seeks the elimination of Israel and the killing of every Jew everywhere - not just in Israel. This is explicitly genocidal. There is no negotiation with such a movement. Eliminating it is the only answer. Just as we sought to eliminate Nazism and ISIS and other similar genocidal movements.
Those who worry about what happens next need to provide an alternative to Israel, one that will not make that country prey to genocidal maniacs. Lots of people are willing to speak hard truths to Israel about obeying the laws of war and civilian deaths and the rest of it. Very few are telling Hamas that it is their genocidal ideology which has brought Gaza to the point it is, that it is their deliberate policy of hiding amongst civilians which is putting Palestinians at risk, it is their refusal to accept Israel's right to exist which means there is not the remotest hope of starting any peace talks.
There is plenty of pressure which needs putting on Israel but Hamas must first be eliminated. It cannot - until it changes what it wants - be a player. It has taken itself outside the universe of civilised decency. So if invasion of Gaza is not the solution, what is? And if we don't have an alternative solution, then we can hardly be surprised if Israel does what it thinks necessary to save itself. What would we do were we in their position?
I sometimes feel that commentators are unwilling to provide or even begin to think about what an alternative might be because - after all the condemnations of Hamas - they give up at expecting anything better from the Palestinians and it is, after all, so much easier and more comfortable to revert to criticising Israel.
I was saying something similar the other day. Gaza allows itself to be ruled by Hamas. It does this in the knowledge that Hamas is committed to the death of all Jews. The murderous assaults came from their territory and seem to have been a source of glee.
I fully get that the residents of Gaza have a terrible life, that they are economically repressed by Israel and made to beg for water and electricity. Israel’s policies have been unenlightened at best and self harming all too often. If I lived in Gaza I would hate the Israeli government and want to resist that oppression.
But if you want to be listened to, if you want things to change, you do not start with the beheading of babies because they are Jews.
It is 17 years since there was an election in Gaza. 17 years during which Hamas has done it's best to kill anyone who actively opposes them. The Palestinians there 'allow' themselves to be ruled by Hamas about as much as the inhabitants of Kabul 'allow' themselves to be ruled by the Taliban.
So send the military in to liberate the populace and destroy Hamas.
2 birds, one stone.
If they were willing to do it in a way that we generally tried to in Afghanistan then I would agree all the way. But they won't. They are simply flattening the place with no regard for Palestinian casualties.
Its war, that happens. They need to flatten the places which Hamas are using.
There are no easy or peaceful solutions in warfare.
Safe refuge out of Gaza should be allowed for those who don't want to be fighting, many towns or cities have lost 95% of their population in Eastern Ukraine, no reason that won't or shouldn't happen in Gaza City too.
The civilians in Eastern Ukraine were allowed to leave. The civilians in Gaza are not.
But interesting that you are now (inadvetently) comparing the what is being done to the Palestinians with what was done to the Ukrainians.
I've made the comparison repeatedly.
Hamas = Russia Ukraine = Israel
Only difference is that Israel has the strength to take the fight onto the invaders territory rather than being forced to have it on their own.
That's not a bad thing, the situations are parallel rather than identical.
That is no excuse for killing civilians no matter how much you might want to. Neither Russia nor Hamas are civilised democratic entities. Israel is supposed to be. Hopefully they will remember that.
There is no excuse for deliberately killing civilians.
Killing civilians who are caught in the crossfire while you are acting in a way proportional to the objective is regrettable but acceptable.
The destruction of Hamas has to be the objective.
And Hamas are embedded in the civilian population. Hamas live there, have arms there, launch missiles there. The slaughter of the civilians of Gaza is explicitly *what Hamas want*.
I do not expect to hear reports of the IDF summarily torturing / mutilating / executing women and children. That kind of depravity isn't just a war crime, it is evil and inhuman. But sadly innocent women and children are being killed in Gaza. And I mourn them as well.
So the calls to open up a humanitarian corridor out of Gaza are right and just. Because the IDF are coming, they have to do what they are to do. There are no other options.
Re corridors - I have yet to hear anyone say where the refugees will go.
It wont be Israel obviously
Bar a handful of lucky folk ( eg Humza Yousafs rellies ) I cant see it being Europe as Europe is already saying it has enough on its hands
Half the arab world is out because its a mess - Libya, Syria, Iraq Lebanon Yemen
And the other half doesnt want the palestinians since they have been difficult citizens
I cant even see the West bank wanting many because of the Hamas\PLO emnity
So where ? Russia, Iran, North Korea ?
Until this is solved calls for corridors mean little.
It should be countries that support Hamas/Palestine, so Iran etc
West Bank has to be out of the question, there's no point getting them out of one part only for them to turn back up in another, Israel would need to do the same to the West Bank if that's where they go.
Turkey or Qatar. Egypt looks like its going to get dumped on.
Neither the West Bank or Jordan will want them as they fked up the countries before
I read some book by Gray several decades ago, and decided he was a bit of a berk. I've not seen any reason to revise that assessment since.
It was probably Straw Dogs. I'm a big fan of Gray and think that book is a masterpiece. On first reading you'll be angry, on second you pay attention and annotate, on third you realise that he's right.
I shall continue to wallow in ignorance, I’m afraid.
"An SNP MP has announced she has quit the party and joined the Tories because of ‘toxic and bullying’ treatment from colleagues.
Lisa Cameron has today announced the bombshell decision to become a Conservative MP after she revealed that the deterioration of her mental health led to her being put on antidepressants.
She said that she has received support from the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in recent weeks after opening up about her mental wellbeing, but no contact from the SNP leadership."
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
I don't know. The Tories need a bit of a boost, and she wants to stick two fingers up to the SNP.
Does there need to be more to it than that? And what can the Tories offer her realistically? They're not going to waste a peerage on her, and she's leaving Parliament at the same time as they are likely to leave Government. She'll get a bit of a hero's welcome, and that'll be nice for her. But I'm not sure there's more to it than the obvious.
The insinuation is that she was bribed into doing it. It’s just a smear.
This seems to be the relevant reason from Sky's report:
An MP has defected from the SNP to join the Conservatives amid accusations of "toxic and bullying" treatment from Westminster colleagues.
Dr Lisa Cameron, the MP for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow since 2015, criticised her treatment by the SNP and its leadership after she spoke out about her colleague, Patrick Grady.
Mr Grady was suspended from the House of Commons for two days last year after he was found to have made an "unwanted sexual advance" to a member of party staff in 2016.
Dr Cameron said she was mistreated by her party after speaking in support of the complainant.
The MP said that she received support from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in recent weeks after opening up about the deterioration of her mental health that led to her being put on antidepressants.
However, she claimed she had received no contact from the SNP leadership.
I am old enough to remember when Israel was being pressed to give up land for peace. Well it did that in Gaza. It gave up land. It removed the settlers. And what it got in return was Hamas and rockets and now massacres.
Israel has made many mistakes over the years. Netanyahu is unquestionably the wrong leader for it, especially at such a time. I fear that an invasion of Gaza now will be a strategic error and lead to all sorts of casualties for the innocent.
But the Palestinians have consistently made huge errors, the biggest one of all being their refusal to accept Israel's right to exist. Hamas seeks the elimination of Israel and the killing of every Jew everywhere - not just in Israel. This is explicitly genocidal. There is no negotiation with such a movement. Eliminating it is the only answer. Just as we sought to eliminate Nazism and ISIS and other similar genocidal movements.
Those who worry about what happens next need to provide an alternative to Israel, one that will not make that country prey to genocidal maniacs. Lots of people are willing to speak hard truths to Israel about obeying the laws of war and civilian deaths and the rest of it. Very few are telling Hamas that it is their genocidal ideology which has brought Gaza to the point it is, that it is their deliberate policy of hiding amongst civilians which is putting Palestinians at risk, it is their refusal to accept Israel's right to exist which means there is not the remotest hope of starting any peace talks.
There is plenty of pressure which needs putting on Israel but Hamas must first be eliminated. It cannot - until it changes what it wants - be a player. It has taken itself outside the universe of civilised decency. So if invasion of Gaza is not the solution, what is? And if we don't have an alternative solution, then we can hardly be surprised if Israel does what it thinks necessary to save itself. What would we do were we in their position?
I sometimes feel that commentators are unwilling to provide or even begin to think about what an alternative might be because - after all the condemnations of Hamas - they give up at expecting anything better from the Palestinians and it is, after all, so much easier and more comfortable to revert to criticising Israel.
I was saying something similar the other day. Gaza allows itself to be ruled by Hamas. It does this in the knowledge that Hamas is committed to the death of all Jews. The murderous assaults came from their territory and seem to have been a source of glee.
I fully get that the residents of Gaza have a terrible life, that they are economically repressed by Israel and made to beg for water and electricity. Israel’s policies have been unenlightened at best and self harming all too often. If I lived in Gaza I would hate the Israeli government and want to resist that oppression.
But if you want to be listened to, if you want things to change, you do not start with the beheading of babies because they are Jews.
It is 17 years since there was an election in Gaza. 17 years during which Hamas has done it's best to kill anyone who actively opposes them. The Palestinians there 'allow' themselves to be ruled by Hamas about as much as the inhabitants of Kabul 'allow' themselves to be ruled by the Taliban.
So send the military in to liberate the populace and destroy Hamas.
2 birds, one stone.
If they were willing to do it in a way that we generally tried to in Afghanistan then I would agree all the way. But they won't. They are simply flattening the place with no regard for Palestinian casualties.
Its war, that happens. They need to flatten the places which Hamas are using.
There are no easy or peaceful solutions in warfare.
Safe refuge out of Gaza should be allowed for those who don't want to be fighting, many towns or cities have lost 95% of their population in Eastern Ukraine, no reason that won't or shouldn't happen in Gaza City too.
The civilians in Eastern Ukraine were allowed to leave. The civilians in Gaza are not.
But interesting that you are now (inadvetently) comparing the what is being done to the Palestinians with what was done to the Ukrainians.
I've made the comparison repeatedly.
Hamas = Russia Ukraine = Israel
Only difference is that Israel has the strength to take the fight onto the invaders territory rather than being forced to have it on their own.
That's not a bad thing, the situations are parallel rather than identical.
That is no excuse for killing civilians no matter how much you might want to. Neither Russia nor Hamas are civilised democratic entities. Israel is supposed to be. Hopefully they will remember that.
There is no excuse for deliberately killing civilians.
Killing civilians who are caught in the crossfire while you are acting in a way proportional to the objective is regrettable but acceptable.
The destruction of Hamas has to be the objective.
And Hamas are embedded in the civilian population. Hamas live there, have arms there, launch missiles there. The slaughter of the civilians of Gaza is explicitly *what Hamas want*.
I do not expect to hear reports of the IDF summarily torturing / mutilating / executing women and children. That kind of depravity isn't just a war crime, it is evil and inhuman. But sadly innocent women and children are being killed in Gaza. And I mourn them as well.
So the calls to open up a humanitarian corridor out of Gaza are right and just. Because the IDF are coming, they have to do what they are to do. There are no other options.
Re corridors - I have yet to hear anyone say where the refugees will go.
It wont be Israel obviously
Bar a handful of lucky folk ( eg Humza Yousafs rellies ) I cant see it being Europe as Europe is already saying it has enough on its hands
Half the arab world is out because its a mess - Libya, Syria, Iraq Lebanon Yemen
And the other half doesnt want the palestinians since they have been difficult citizens
I cant even see the West bank wanting many because of the Hamas\PLO emnity
So where ? Russia, Iran, North Korea ?
Until this is solved calls for corridors mean little.
It should be countries that support Hamas/Palestine, so Iran etc
West Bank has to be out of the question, there's no point getting them out of one part only for them to turn back up in another, Israel would need to do the same to the West Bank if that's where they go.
Turkey or Qatar. Egypt looks like its going to get dumped on.
Neither the West Bank or Jordan will want them as they fked up the countries before
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Royal Mint give figures for the number of coins minted each year.
More than 42 million 20p pieces minted in 2022 for example, compared to more than 150 million in 2003. They estimate about 29 billion coins in circulation.
The biggest barrier to you regularly coming across a KCIII coin is simply the declining number of cash transactions that you are making. So many fewer coins are travelling through your hands.
Indeed, and it's been an increasing problem for Primary School teachers for a while now. Because so few children handle coins these days (for a variety of reasons) the standard methods for inculcating practical mental arithmetic are disappearing. There's less need (and less comprehension for the need) to calculate change due, or the combinations of coins needed to buy sweets etc.
(Also, thanks for the Royal Mail info.)
One of the sites I work in has a preponderance of younger people or migrants working the tills. If I pay in my usual way (say if charged £9:57 and the closest I can get is £10:57 I give them that and ask for a pound coin) it causes them real problems, to the point of mild panic. It's genuinely concerning.
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
In my twenty years of experiencing housing market dysfunction in the UK - and having heard every excuse under the sun, from evil landlords, to greedy foreigners, to lazy councils, to selfish nimbys - the essential issue is that Britain doesn’t zone enough space for housing.
Such zones do not need to be new land area. They could, and in the main should, be “up”, as Auckland has done successfully in the last several years.
But we need to mandate zoning and area plans for every local authority, and strong design codes as well.
And then after that, we need the planning system to let people get on with it, instead of strangling them with a thousand petty rules and a thousand opportunities for people object.
"They could, and in the main should, be “up”,"
A significant issue is that the British 'dream' is not a flat in a tall tower block. It is a detached or semi-detached house with garage and a garden. Hence that is what builders try to build, squeezing as many such houses onto as small a plot as possible.
It is a situation made worse by the tower block disasters of the 1960s and 1970s, reinforced by Grenfell and access to gardens during Covid lockdowns.
Perhaps this should change; but good luck with that.
Its not an issue. If that's what people want, that's what they should get.
Let those who want to live in tower blocks or apartments do so. If people want a home with a garden then they should have one.
Though you can have a home with a garden that is still building up. My house is a three bed semi that takes no more space than my grandparents 1 bed bungalow, because its built over 2 stories. Some people like 3 stories now too.
I lie in a three-storey townhouse. It's okay, but not ideal with a baby/toddler.
But it's still possible to live in a three-story townhouse and have a (tiny) garden and garage. As I, and my neighbours, have.
I totally agree. Those who want to live in a flat should ideally have the option. The problem - which was the point of my post - is that too few people do. The dream is for a starter home to be a nice detached (or, at a push, semi) on a pleasant cul-de-sac, with garage and garden.
Until that 'dream' alters, we'll have these problems with flats.
I don't have a garage, I have a driveway, I certainly wouldn't consider it a requirement for either a starter or typical home. Its a nice to have rather than a must have like a private garden for me.
If few people want to live in flats, that's not a problem whatsoever. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that starter homes can't be semi detached with a garden. Just need to build enough of them.
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
I do not hate @148grss for using the More quote in this context.
But I do think he refuses to accept the reality of Hamas's explicitly genocidal approach to Israel and Jews. Nor has he come up with any possible alternative to what Israel should do. Which comes pretty close to saying that Israel should not defend itself at all. Self-defence is lawful and is also morally right. A state has a duty to defend its citizens.
We should be arguing about the how not the whether. There is no easy answer to this. But it would be a lot easier if Hamas and Egypt allowed civilians to leave. That they won't suggests to me that they want innocent Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to use this a stick with which to beat Israel. The moral repulsiveness of this should be called out.
I rather fear that far too many are in the Israel must not do anything at all camp. The consequences of that are existential for Israel and Jews. Effectively forbidding a country from defending itself is repellent. We did it to Bosnian Muslims when we denied them arms and then wrung our hands when Srebenicza happened. We should not now make the same mistake again.
Seems the SNP are in a worse state than the conservative party
Funny if the Tories cling to power at the next election as a result of gaining a few seats from the SNP. (Unlikely).
It's unlikely in the sense I suspect Labour will win quite handsomely.
But if it is a closer election than currently appears to be the case, it's perfectly possible. Indeed, Ruth Davidson's Scottish Tories making 12 gains in 2017 absolutely saved May's hide - essentially she'd have been on 305 seats but for those gains, the DUP wouldn't have been an option for her and, whilst it wouldn't have put Corbyn in Number 10 immediately as he'd not have had a route either, May would certainly have been out two years before she was and there would have very likely been a further election in 2017. An interesting counterfactual.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Royal Mint give figures for the number of coins minted each year.
More than 42 million 20p pieces minted in 2022 for example, compared to more than 150 million in 2003. They estimate about 29 billion coins in circulation.
The biggest barrier to you regularly coming across a KCIII coin is simply the declining number of cash transactions that you are making. So many fewer coins are travelling through your hands.
Indeed, and it's been an increasing problem for Primary School teachers for a while now. Because so few children handle coins these days (for a variety of reasons) the standard methods for inculcating practical mental arithmetic are disappearing. There's less need (and less comprehension for the need) to calculate change due, or the combinations of coins needed to buy sweets etc.
(Also, thanks for the Royal Mail info.)
One of the sites I work in has a preponderance of younger people or migrants working the tills. If I pay in my usual way (say if charged £9:57 and the closest I can get is £10:57 I give them that and ask for a pound coin) it causes them real problems, to the point of mild panic. It's genuinely concerning.
Yes, it’s amazing how many cashiers can’t work out change without reference to the computer! Especially with examples such as you give, paying an amount over to get a round number back in change.
I suspect one reason Lisa Cameron might not have defected to Labour is because they already have a candidate for East Kilbride Michael Shanks MP @mgshanks We’ve all said it, here’s the proof. Vote SNP, get Tory.
But soon East Kilbride will have the chance to vote for real change with a Labour Government and a brilliant MP in @JoaniReid .
More smears.
“ Dr Cameron has said she will stand down at the next general election, which is expected next year, according to Mr Ross.”
I do not hate @148grss for using the More quote in this context.
But I do think he refuses to accept the reality of Hamas's explicitly genocidal approach to Israel and Jews. Nor has he come up with any possible alternative to what Israel should do. Which comes pretty close to saying that Israel should not defend itself at all. Self-defence is lawful and is also morally right. A state has a duty to defend its citizens.
We should be arguing about the how not the whether. There is no easy answer to this. But it would be a lot easier if Hamas and Egypt allowed civilians to leave. That they won't suggests to me that they want innocent Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to use this a stick with which to beat Israel. The moral repulsiveness of this should be called out.
I rather fear that far too many are in the Israel must not do anything at all camp. The consequences of that are existential for Israel and Jews. Effectively forbidding a country from defending itself is repellent. We did it to Bosnian Muslims when we denied them arms and then wrung our hands when Srebenicza happened. We should not now make the same mistake again.
There’s a train of thought that Netanyahu wants Palestinians to leave Gaza into Egypt and then Israel can annex that .
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Really like the one near me. Keeps me updated how long I have got left, very easy to use. The problem is the proliferation of them, not the app per se.
If there was one app to rule them all, I might agree (but there should be alternative options - cash - for anyone without a smartphone, or whose phone has run out). But there isn't one app.
Incidentally, near me there has been the following hilarity: different sections of what may (IMV) reasonably appear to be the same car park, run by different companies.
"Drivers left confused after being hit with parking fines at St Neots car park despite buying ticket"
It can be disclosed that the Football Association rejected a proposal by Lord Mann, the Government’s adviser on anti-Semitism, to illuminate Wembley’s iconic structure on Thursday night instead of during the England-Australia match.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Really like the one near me. Keeps me updated how long I have got left, very easy to use. The problem is the proliferation of them, not the app per se.
I always find it slightly strange there seems to be 27,000 different ones. Economies of scale, combined platform / developed etc you would think by now one or two would be winning out, as in most tech opportunities.
That is what is happening - it will just take a while.
Contrary to what some are claiming they did not want to lose Gaza.
Their intention was to destroy the Saudi-Israel peace talks (mission accomplished) and they thought that the US and the rest of the West would hold Israel back from taking the fight to Hamas in Gaza.
They wanted to have their cake and eat it too, it could be said.
They were wrong. America and Europe are quite rightly not holding Israel back. Israel is right to, and entitled to, destroy Hamas.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Really like the one near me. Keeps me updated how long I have got left, very easy to use. The problem is the proliferation of them, not the app per se.
If there was one app to rule them all, I might agree (but there should be alternative options - cash - for anyone without a smartphone, or whose phone has run out). But there isn't one app.
Incidentally, near me there has been the following hilarity: different sections of what may (IMV) reasonably appear to be the same car park, run by different companies.
"Drivers left confused after being hit with parking fines at St Neots car park despite buying ticket"
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
Any particular reason? Two US Navy carrier groups not up to the job?
Sunak channeling his Churchill . When does he give his speech from the no 10 lectern ? The USA has loads of military assets to help . Why does the UK need to send ships .
He could announce he's ensuring military assets in the area and leave it at that, without mentioning he means the bases in Cyprus.
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
I do not hate @148grss for using the More quote in this context.
But I do think he refuses to accept the reality of Hamas's explicitly genocidal approach to Israel and Jews. Nor has he come up with any possible alternative to what Israel should do. Which comes pretty close to saying that Israel should not defend itself at all. Self-defence is lawful and is also morally right. A state has a duty to defend its citizens.
We should be arguing about the how not the whether. There is no easy answer to this. But it would be a lot easier if Hamas and Egypt allowed civilians to leave. That they won't suggests to me that they want innocent Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to use this a stick with which to beat Israel. The moral repulsiveness of this should be called out.
I rather fear that far too many are in the Israel must not do anything at all camp. The consequences of that are existential for Israel and Jews. Effectively forbidding a country from defending itself is repellent. We did it to Bosnian Muslims when we denied them arms and then wrung our hands when Srebenicza happened. We should not now make the same mistake again.
US warns Israel to ‘uphold laws of war’ as Gaza faces onslaught Biden says ‘respect for international law’ imperative as UN warns the humanitarian situation is deteriorating for Palestinians ... President Joe Biden said Israel had a right to respond to the attacks by Hamas, the worst in its 75-year history, but warned its retaliatory action must be “according to the rule of law”. ... US Secretary of State [Blinken] said it is “our respect for international law and the laws of war” that “separates Israel, the US and other democracies” from Hamas and terrorist groups that engage in “heinous” activities.
He added: “We know that Israel will take all of the precautions that it can” to avoid civilian casualties, “just as we would”.
The Tories should send illegals not to Rwanda, but to Gaza instead.
How, Sunil? Who gives the order, who puts them on the plane/boat, who crews the ship, who unloads them at the other end? Who in Gaza lets them in? The British civil service and (don't laugh) the Royal Navy are not murderers, and asking to do something lethally bad to civilians is corrosive. Stuff doesn't happen by waving a wand, as the present political class badly need to understand.
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
She could move seat. Alistair Jack and Douglas Ross and are both standing down as MPs
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
..so, apart from the Times being generally horrible about the SNP apparently, does the story have any substance or weight to it? You haven't said, so I've no idea, and I'd not want to be a fake Scot expert and make up my mind without hearing the other side, if there is one.
Also, if you are willing to say which outlets are approved to report on Scottish matters that would be useful, though obviously you're under no obligation to do so.
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
So you condone her racism.
Noted with thanks.
Gosh, it REALLY rankles.
Nope, it is funny, I remember when Stuart used to get upset when I asked him his comment the day before the Indyref that 'The clueless wonders round here' were in for a shock' was evidence of Scotch expertise?
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
I don't know. The Tories need a bit of a boost, and she wants to stick two fingers up to the SNP.
Does there need to be more to it than that? And what can the Tories offer her realistically? They're not going to waste a peerage on her, and she's leaving Parliament at the same time as they are likely to leave Government. She'll get a bit of a hero's welcome, and that'll be nice for her. But I'm not sure there's more to it than the obvious.
The insinuation is that she was bribed into doing it. It’s just a smear.
Oh come on. Whilst I agree with you that there probably wasn't a deal in this case for the reasons I stated, it wouldn't be at all unusual for a potentially defecting MP to say, "You know what, I think I still have a lot to offer in public life. Out of interest, I wondered what form my service to the nation might take were I to take the bold step of joining your party?"
That might all be a bit grubby, but it isn't cash in brown envelopes.
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
It is interesting how he does this stuff again and again and again with seemingly no repercussions nor him changing behaviour. Others have lost their career over far less.
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
She could move seat. Alistair Jack and Douglas Ross and are both standing down as MPs
Both seats likely to be lost, but woudl have been worth a go if she had no options.
But from the reporting it does simply appear as suggested to be an FU situation.
Any particular reason? Two US Navy carrier groups not up to the job?
Sunak channeling his Churchill . When does he give his speech from the no 10 lectern ? The USA has loads of military assets to help . Why does the UK need to send ships .
He could announce he's ensuring military assets in the area and leave it at that, without mentioning he means the bases in Cyprus.
Cyprus doesn’t need to be brought into Sunaks pathetic lapdog to the USA . The island has suffered enough from being screwed by the UK and the USA.
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
I don't know. The Tories need a bit of a boost, and she wants to stick two fingers up to the SNP.
Does there need to be more to it than that? And what can the Tories offer her realistically? They're not going to waste a peerage on her, and she's leaving Parliament at the same time as they are likely to leave Government. She'll get a bit of a hero's welcome, and that'll be nice for her. But I'm not sure there's more to it than the obvious.
The insinuation is that she was bribed into doing it. It’s just a smear.
Oh come on. Whilst I agree with you that there probably wasn't a deal in this case for the reasons I stated, it wouldn't be at all unusual for a potentially defecting MP to say, "You know what, I think I still have a lot to offer in public life. Out of interest, I wondered what form that might take were I to take the bold step of joining your party?"
That might all be a bit grubby, but it isn't cash in brown envelopes.
Maybe it is unusual, maybe it is not. But the original tweet claimed there definitely was one, that she definitely received some incentive to defect. That’s a smear because it is not backed up with any evidence whatsoever.
The Tories should send illegals not to Rwanda, but to Gaza instead.
How, Sunil? Who gives the order, who puts them on the plane/boat, who crews the ship, who unloads them at the other end? Who in Gaza lets them in? The British civil service and (don't laugh) the Royal Navy are not murderers, and asking to do something lethally bad to civilians is corrosive. Stuff doesn't happen by waving a wand, as the present political class badly need to understand.
[sigh]
What did I say yesterday, quoting Lt. Saavik?: "Humor, it is a difficult concept. It is not logical."
Some of the repots of the Hamas attack at the weekend indicate - to me, a non-expert - that they may have had significant training. Such as foreign training.
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
He also famously blew his top when some hapless sub-editor removed an 'a' from one his articles.
Any particular reason? Two US Navy carrier groups not up to the job?
Sunak channeling his Churchill . When does he give his speech from the no 10 lectern ? The USA has loads of military assets to help . Why does the UK need to send ships .
He could announce he's ensuring military assets in the area and leave it at that, without mentioning he means the bases in Cyprus.
Cyprus doesn’t need to be brought into Sunaks pathetic lapdog to the USA . The island has suffered enough from being screwed by the UK and the USA.
I wasn't suggesting itbe brought in in any fashion. Merely that if he wants to simply look like he is doing something without really doing anything implying something is simpler than sending a boat to be a spectator.
I do not hate @148grss for using the More quote in this context.
But I do think he refuses to accept the reality of Hamas's explicitly genocidal approach to Israel and Jews. Nor has he come up with any possible alternative to what Israel should do. Which comes pretty close to saying that Israel should not defend itself at all. Self-defence is lawful and is also morally right. A state has a duty to defend its citizens.
We should be arguing about the how not the whether. There is no easy answer to this. But it would be a lot easier if Hamas and Egypt allowed civilians to leave. That they won't suggests to me that they want innocent Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to use this a stick with which to beat Israel. The moral repulsiveness of this should be called out.
I rather fear that far too many are in the Israel must not do anything at all camp. The consequences of that are existential for Israel and Jews. Effectively forbidding a country from defending itself is repellent. We did it to Bosnian Muslims when we denied them arms and then wrung our hands when Srebenicza happened. We should not now make the same mistake again.
US warns Israel to ‘uphold laws of war’ as Gaza faces onslaught Biden says ‘respect for international law’ imperative as UN warns the humanitarian situation is deteriorating for Palestinians ... President Joe Biden said Israel had a right to respond to the attacks by Hamas, the worst in its 75-year history, but warned its retaliatory action must be “according to the rule of law”. ... US Secretary of State [Blinken] said it is “our respect for international law and the laws of war” that “separates Israel, the US and other democracies” from Hamas and terrorist groups that engage in “heinous” activities.
He added: “We know that Israel will take all of the precautions that it can” to avoid civilian casualties, “just as we would”.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
Any particular reason? Two US Navy carrier groups not up to the job?
Sunak channeling his Churchill . When does he give his speech from the no 10 lectern ? The USA has loads of military assets to help . Why does the UK need to send ships .
He could announce he's ensuring military assets in the area and leave it at that, without mentioning he means the bases in Cyprus.
Cyprus doesn’t need to be brought into Sunaks pathetic lapdog to the USA . The island has suffered enough from being screwed by the UK and the USA.
I wasn't suggesting itbe brought in in any fashion. Merely that if he wants to simply look like he is doing something without really doing anything implying something is simpler than sending a boat to be a spectator.
I know . Sorry I wasn’t implying you were , that was aimed at Sunak .
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
He also famously blew his top when some hapless sub-editor removed an 'a' from one his articles.
Some of the repots of the Hamas attack at the weekend indicate - to me, a non-expert - that they may have had significant training. Such as foreign training.
There was some sophistication to the attack.
Quite likely.
Likely too that they have been trained in urban defensive warfare. We have seen in Ukraine how destructive and costly in terms of blood that is.
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
It is interesting how he does this stuff again and again and again with seemingly no repercussions nor him changing behaviour. Others have lost their career over far less.
The French Minister of the Interior, Gérald Darmanin has ordered that Pro-Palestinian Demonstrations across the Country be Banned and that anybody who Participates in them will be Arrested.
No people here who usually like to defend "freedom of speech" want to shout about authoritarians on this one? Again - what is wrong with demonstrating in favour of the Palestinian people and making it clear you don't want them to be war crimed? If anyone openly supports Hamas or says Israelis deserve to die - sure, that sounds like hate speech / incitement. But just being pro Palestinian?
Personally, I think its a terrible decision from the French. Particularly given it is a nation who prides itself on protest, often excusing even violent protest, as their right to express their feelings. It also rather plays into those claims of racism in how the French authorities treat different types of people.
Yes: however distasteful it is, free speech has to include free speech one disagrees with.
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
He also famously blew his top when some hapless sub-editor removed an 'a' from one his articles.
Hamas has played a blinder. Netanyahu's reputation as pro-Trump, pro-Putin anti-democratic maniac has been glaringly exposed to the world in recent times. Israel won't get a shred of sympathy. In terms of propaganda, Hamas holds all the cards here.
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
I don't know. The Tories need a bit of a boost, and she wants to stick two fingers up to the SNP.
Does there need to be more to it than that? And what can the Tories offer her realistically? They're not going to waste a peerage on her, and she's leaving Parliament at the same time as they are likely to leave Government. She'll get a bit of a hero's welcome, and that'll be nice for her. But I'm not sure there's more to it than the obvious.
The insinuation is that she was bribed into doing it. It’s just a smear.
Oh come on. Whilst I agree with you that there probably wasn't a deal in this case for the reasons I stated, it wouldn't be at all unusual for a potentially defecting MP to say, "You know what, I think I still have a lot to offer in public life. Out of interest, I wondered what form that might take were I to take the bold step of joining your party?"
That might all be a bit grubby, but it isn't cash in brown envelopes.
Maybe it is unusual, maybe it is not. But the original tweet claimed there definitely was one, that she definitely received some incentive to defect. That’s a smear because it is not backed up with any evidence whatsoever.
It is backed by evidence. That evidence is circumstantial and I don't personally think the case is proved. But circumstantial evidence is evidence.
I do not hate @148grss for using the More quote in this context.
But I do think he refuses to accept the reality of Hamas's explicitly genocidal approach to Israel and Jews. Nor has he come up with any possible alternative to what Israel should do. Which comes pretty close to saying that Israel should not defend itself at all. Self-defence is lawful and is also morally right. A state has a duty to defend its citizens.
We should be arguing about the how not the whether. There is no easy answer to this. But it would be a lot easier if Hamas and Egypt allowed civilians to leave. That they won't suggests to me that they want innocent Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to use this a stick with which to beat Israel. The moral repulsiveness of this should be called out…
There’s perhaps more to it than that.
Sisi’s reluctance to accept a million or more refugees is possibly more motivated by a fear for his own position. It’s not a simple matter of opening the crossing point, even if (for example) the US or others were to provide funding for the refugees.
There’s also the awkward fact that most Palestinians, whether they support Hamas or not, might still choose not to leave. That’s unknowable - but a Palestinian journalist interviewed at length on PM this evening said that was the case with almost everyone she’d asked.
You’re right, of course, that Hamas are probably quite happy to see mass casualties to advance their cause, or even intend as much.
"A woman who spent 20 years saving for her dream wedding has thrown herself her own big day after not meeting the right partner.
Sarah Wilkinson, 42, decided to hold a wedding ceremony conducted by her celebrant friend at Harvest House in Felixstowe, Suffolk. The credit controller said the occasion was a natural progression after she treated herself to an engagement ring. "It was a lovely day for me to be centre of attention," she said. "The ceremony wasn't an official wedding, but I had my wedding day. "I think you get to the point where you think 'I might not have this with a partner by my side, but why should I miss out?' "That money was reserved for my wedding - it was a case of it's there and why not use it for something I want to do."
"It was a lovely day for me to be centre of attention," she said. 'Ms Wilkinson said she wrote 14 vows for her to honour, with the first being a promise never to relinquish control of the TV remote.' Thereby explaining why she has not found a life partner, marriage is supposed to be a commitment to partnership and caring for another for life, not another act of self love for social media
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
..so, apart from the Times being generally horrible about the SNP apparently, does the story have any substance or weight to it? You haven't said, so I've no idea, and I'd not want to be a fake Scot expert and make up my mind without hearing the other side, if there is one.
Also, if you are willing to say which outlets are approved to report on Scottish matters that would be useful, though obviously you're under no obligation to do so.
Thanks for advising me that I’m under no obligation, bit of a relief that.
"A woman who spent 20 years saving for her dream wedding has thrown herself her own big day after not meeting the right partner.
Sarah Wilkinson, 42, decided to hold a wedding ceremony conducted by her celebrant friend at Harvest House in Felixstowe, Suffolk. The credit controller said the occasion was a natural progression after she treated herself to an engagement ring. "It was a lovely day for me to be centre of attention," she said. "The ceremony wasn't an official wedding, but I had my wedding day. "I think you get to the point where you think 'I might not have this with a partner by my side, but why should I miss out?' "That money was reserved for my wedding - it was a case of it's there and why not use it for something I want to do."
"It was a lovely day for me to be centre of attention," she said.
Thereby explaining why she has not found a life partner, marriage is supposed to be a commitment to partnership and caring for another for life, not another act of self love for social media
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
I don't know. The Tories need a bit of a boost, and she wants to stick two fingers up to the SNP.
Does there need to be more to it than that? And what can the Tories offer her realistically? They're not going to waste a peerage on her, and she's leaving Parliament at the same time as they are likely to leave Government. She'll get a bit of a hero's welcome, and that'll be nice for her. But I'm not sure there's more to it than the obvious.
The insinuation is that she was bribed into doing it. It’s just a smear.
Oh come on. Whilst I agree with you that there probably wasn't a deal in this case for the reasons I stated, it wouldn't be at all unusual for a potentially defecting MP to say, "You know what, I think I still have a lot to offer in public life. Out of interest, I wondered what form that might take were I to take the bold step of joining your party?"
That might all be a bit grubby, but it isn't cash in brown envelopes.
Maybe it is unusual, maybe it is not. But the original tweet claimed there definitely was one, that she definitely received some incentive to defect. That’s a smear because it is not backed up with any evidence whatsoever.
It is backed by evidence. That evidence is circumstantial and I don't personally think the case is proved. But circumstantial evidence is evidence.
I disagree. The insinuation that her decision was motivated by profit is not backed by any evidence, circumstantial or otherwise.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
I am not sure what your council is like but each one I have lived in treats motoring consultations as box ticking to get to its pre agreed answer and has little interest in what residents or businesses actually want.
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
So you condone her racism.
Noted with thanks.
Gosh, it REALLY rankles.
Most decent people find that blatant racism rankles. Divisive racist nats get very rankled when they are called out as blatant racists
Israel releases images of babies murdered and burned by Hamas as 'verified photos' of others beheaded by terrorists are 'confirmed' by local media and rescue team reveals pregnant woman 'had child sliced from her womb'
Hamas has played a blinder. Netanyahu's reputation as pro-Trump, pro-Putin anti-democratic maniac has been glaringly exposed to the world in recent times. Israel won't get a shred of sympathy. In terms of propaganda, Hamas holds all the cards here.
There’s been a few raving bonkers takes on this conflict from people here. Best maintain a dignified silence from a glass house.
In my twenty years of experiencing housing market dysfunction in the UK - and having heard every excuse under the sun, from evil landlords, to greedy foreigners, to lazy councils, to selfish nimbys - the essential issue is that Britain doesn’t zone enough space for housing.
Such zones do not need to be new land area. They could, and in the main should, be “up”, as Auckland has done successfully in the last several years.
But we need to mandate zoning and area plans for every local authority, and strong design codes as well.
And then after that, we need the planning system to let people get on with it, instead of strangling them with a thousand petty rules and a thousand opportunities for people object.
"They could, and in the main should, be “up”,"
A significant issue is that the British 'dream' is not a flat in a tall tower block. It is a detached or semi-detached house with garage and a garden. Hence that is what builders try to build, squeezing as many such houses onto as small a plot as possible.
It is a situation made worse by the tower block disasters of the 1960s and 1970s, reinforced by Grenfell and access to gardens during Covid lockdowns.
Perhaps this should change; but good luck with that.
Its not an issue. If that's what people want, that's what they should get.
Let those who want to live in tower blocks or apartments do so. If people want a home with a garden then they should have one.
Though you can have a home with a garden that is still building up. My house is a three bed semi that takes no more space than my grandparents 1 bed bungalow, because its built over 2 stories. Some people like 3 stories now too.
I lie in a three-storey townhouse. It's okay, but not ideal with a baby/toddler.
But it's still possible to live in a three-story townhouse and have a (tiny) garden and garage. As I, and my neighbours, have.
I totally agree. Those who want to live in a flat should ideally have the option. The problem - which was the point of my post - is that too few people do. The dream is for a starter home to be a nice detached (or, at a push, semi) on a pleasant cul-de-sac, with garage and garden.
Until that 'dream' alters, we'll have these problems with flats.
I live in a three bedroom flat in a five storey building along with 49 other families of different ages and nationalities and lots of dogs (in 49 other flats to be clear).
We party regularly in the communal gardens and generally support one another and have a good life. My daughters are delighted. It's like sheltered housing but not full of oldies.
Scottish Nationalism is full of bigotry, we see it on here with Scotch experts.
An SNP councillor who called a Sri Lankan-born Labour opponent a “new Scot” has been reported to a watchdog over the “racist” remarks.
Kairin van Sweeden, an Aberdeen city councillor, made the comments about Deena Tissera during a heated meeting on Wednesday on the cost of living crisis and how to spend city funds.
“I realise as a ‘new Scot’, councillor Tissera maybe doesn’t know about the mitigations [to austerity] that the SNP government have had to put in over the years,” Van Sweeden said. “For example, the bedroom tax . . . Maybe you’re not aware of the bedroom tax?”
Tissera, councillor for Hilton, Woodside and Stockethill, moved to Aberdeen for university and became a British citizen in June. Last year she became the first woman of colour to be elected as an Aberdeen city councillor.
She has reported the incident to the Standards Commission, the body that policies the conduct of councillors in Scotland. She has also written to Humza Yousaf, asking him to suspend Van Sweeden and investigate her comment
M Tauqeer Malik, the Labour group leader, interrupted Van Sweeden to protest at her comments, leaving David Cameron, the lord provost, unable to regain control of the chamber.
“I would like to be respected,” Tissera told the chamber. “I do not appreciate those comments. I have taken the Life in the UK test to become a citizen. I probably know more than you do.”
Cameron adjourned the council meeting in an attempt to calm the situation.
Van Sweeden later told the meeting: “I would like to apologise to councillor Tissera unreservedly if anything I said to you has caused personal offence in any way. I hope you can accept my apology.”
Tissera said that the comments made her feel like “an outsider” and that she was “absolutely hurt” by her words. “I’m not a second-class citizen. I am a citizen of this country,” she added.
Tissera later told the Press and Journal that she believed Van Sweeden’s comments were “absolutely racist” and criticised her “empty apology”.
“The innuendo was that I had just come off the boat and, as a so-called new Scot, I was not as Scottish as others in the room,” she said.
“And therefore, it insinuates I do not know about Scotland despite being a British citizen.
It's great that the PB Scotch experts thing still rankles.
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
..so, apart from the Times being generally horrible about the SNP apparently, does the story have any substance or weight to it? You haven't said, so I've no idea, and I'd not want to be a fake Scot expert and make up my mind without hearing the other side, if there is one.
Also, if you are willing to say which outlets are approved to report on Scottish matters that would be useful, though obviously you're under no obligation to do so.
Thanks for advising me that I’m under no obligation, bit of a relief that.
Look, you're the one who took the time to piss on The Times for reporting on the story, gentle sarcasm in response seems appropriate. Something about it seems to have upset you (you'll laugh that off, of course, but if someone else tore apart the Guardian or Telegraph reporting on something without addressing the story you would certainly point that out).
I mean, seriously, look at what you wrote - a petty whinge about the paper reporting on the story without any mention of whether there is any substance to the story, or if it is in fact a complete nonsense.
And since you react very negatively to anyone you don't approve of commenting on scottish political matters, deriding their ignorance, why wouldn't you expect people to ask for your view, since you condemn anyone commenting without sufficient knowledge? We're not allowed to comment or hold opinions without having proper knowledge of the area it seems, and The Times cannot be trusted apparentlt, so what should we believe? Obviously not the Times apparently.
Help a non-expect out, please? You got mad at the Times for reporting on it so you cannot pretend you don't care at all about it. I'm genuinely curious if its a manufactured row or if its got substance to it.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
I am not sure what your council is like but each one I have lived in treats motoring consultations as box ticking to get to its pre agreed answer and has little interest in what residents or businesses actually want.
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
People can vote against them, and they will presumably lose income in several ways (from parking and from other forms of income) if people are dissuaded from visiting.
There are loads of ways that a Council might make it marginally (or indeed significantly) harder for a visitor to park in an area - they could reduce spaces, expand residents' parking, pedestrianise areas, build affordable housing on a car park, increase charges, reduce maximum stays... are you going to regulate all of them from Westminster and Whitehall as well, or are you just going to have a laser focus on Parliament preventing Chipping Sodbury Council from putting people visiting from Elgin to the minor bother of downloading an app, as if that's the most consequential thing?
Israel releases images of babies murdered and burned by Hamas as 'verified photos' of others beheaded by terrorists are 'confirmed' by local media and rescue team reveals pregnant woman 'had child sliced from her womb'
"A woman who spent 20 years saving for her dream wedding has thrown herself her own big day after not meeting the right partner.
Sarah Wilkinson, 42, decided to hold a wedding ceremony conducted by her celebrant friend at Harvest House in Felixstowe, Suffolk. The credit controller said the occasion was a natural progression after she treated herself to an engagement ring. "It was a lovely day for me to be centre of attention," she said. "The ceremony wasn't an official wedding, but I had my wedding day. "I think you get to the point where you think 'I might not have this with a partner by my side, but why should I miss out?' "That money was reserved for my wedding - it was a case of it's there and why not use it for something I want to do."
"It was a lovely day for me to be centre of attention," she said. 'Ms Wilkinson said she wrote 14 vows for her to honour, with the first being a promise never to relinquish control of the TV remote.' Thereby explaining why she has not found a life partner, marriage is supposed to be a commitment to partnership and caring for another for life, not another act of self love for social media
It's quite probable that she will now find a life partner, having given up on the idea and therefore stopped being in a state of anxious longing about it.
Hamas has played a blinder. Netanyahu's reputation as pro-Trump, pro-Putin anti-democratic maniac has been glaringly exposed to the world in recent times. Israel won't get a shred of sympathy. In terms of propaganda, Hamas holds all the cards here.
Trump himself appears to be not very pro-Netanyahu judging by his recent remarks...
"In emails to Mr Eden, which the journalist shared on Twitter, Mr Coren told him: 'You are a despicable disgusting piece of s**t. You're a lying conniving c**t. I hope you f***ing rot in hell'."
That would make even Sir Keir blush.
Giles Coren really is a piece of work.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
He also famously blew his top when some hapless sub-editor removed an 'a' from one his articles.
In my twenty years of experiencing housing market dysfunction in the UK - and having heard every excuse under the sun, from evil landlords, to greedy foreigners, to lazy councils, to selfish nimbys - the essential issue is that Britain doesn’t zone enough space for housing.
Such zones do not need to be new land area. They could, and in the main should, be “up”, as Auckland has done successfully in the last several years.
But we need to mandate zoning and area plans for every local authority, and strong design codes as well.
And then after that, we need the planning system to let people get on with it, instead of strangling them with a thousand petty rules and a thousand opportunities for people object.
"They could, and in the main should, be “up”,"
A significant issue is that the British 'dream' is not a flat in a tall tower block. It is a detached or semi-detached house with garage and a garden. Hence that is what builders try to build, squeezing as many such houses onto as small a plot as possible.
It is a situation made worse by the tower block disasters of the 1960s and 1970s, reinforced by Grenfell and access to gardens during Covid lockdowns.
Perhaps this should change; but good luck with that.
Its not an issue. If that's what people want, that's what they should get.
Let those who want to live in tower blocks or apartments do so. If people want a home with a garden then they should have one.
Though you can have a home with a garden that is still building up. My house is a three bed semi that takes no more space than my grandparents 1 bed bungalow, because its built over 2 stories. Some people like 3 stories now too.
I lie in a three-storey townhouse. It's okay, but not ideal with a baby/toddler.
But it's still possible to live in a three-story townhouse and have a (tiny) garden and garage. As I, and my neighbours, have.
I totally agree. Those who want to live in a flat should ideally have the option. The problem - which was the point of my post - is that too few people do. The dream is for a starter home to be a nice detached (or, at a push, semi) on a pleasant cul-de-sac, with garage and garden.
Until that 'dream' alters, we'll have these problems with flats.
I live in a three bedroom flat in a five storey building along with 49 other families of different ages and nationalities and lots of dogs (in 49 other flats to be clear).
We party regularly in the communal gardens and generally support one another and have a good life. My daughters are delighted. It's like sheltered housing but not full of oldies.
Good for you, if that's what you like.
I'd rather have a private garden. I have warm relations with my neighbours, but I wouldn't want to share a garden with them any more than a living room.
The key is personal choice. Everyone should be free to choose.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
I am not sure what your council is like but each one I have lived in treats motoring consultations as box ticking to get to its pre agreed answer and has little interest in what residents or businesses actually want.
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
They may have some interest, technically, but 95% of the time no one responds to or is interested in such consultations, or says nothing relevant when they do, so they won't be super responsive either.
Hamas has played a blinder. Netanyahu's reputation as pro-Trump, pro-Putin anti-democratic maniac has been glaringly exposed to the world in recent times. Israel won't get a shred of sympathy. In terms of propaganda, Hamas holds all the cards here.
Trump himself appears to be not very pro-Netanyahu judging by his recent remarks...
He's bought and paid for by Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin so why is that a surprise?
He wants to offer succour to America's traditional enemies, and scorn America's allies.
Hamas has played a blinder. Netanyahu's reputation as pro-Trump, pro-Putin anti-democratic maniac has been glaringly exposed to the world in recent times. Israel won't get a shred of sympathy. In terms of propaganda, Hamas holds all the cards here.
Trump himself appears to be not very pro-Netanyahu judging by his recent remarks...
Trump is just pissed he’s not the centre of attention.
Israel releases images of babies murdered and burned by Hamas as 'verified photos' of others beheaded by terrorists are 'confirmed' by local media and rescue team reveals pregnant woman 'had child sliced from her womb'
Since we're instructed that the Times cannot be trusted because they hate the SNP or whatever, can anyone find an approved source which has a view on the Aberdeen matter? If politicians are blowing things out of proportion using racism as a smokescreen that's worth condemning after all.
And since non-experts cannot comment themselves or ask for comment from experts, apparently, I'd like to come to a view somehow at least, so I can privately condemn or acquit in my own mind.
Also, remember that whinging about papers you don't like is only worth mocking when right wing loons do it. When you do it it is fully justified of course (drawing attention to it is probably going to be labelled as obsessive or something, because 2-3 comments is obsession).
I read some book by Gray several decades ago, and decided he was a bit of a berk. I've not seen any reason to revise that assessment since.
It was probably Straw Dogs. I'm a big fan of Gray and think that book is a masterpiece. On first reading you'll be angry, on second you pay attention and annotate, on third you realise that he's right.
I think his best book was False Dawn in 1997. It is significant because it was the time before 9/11 when the world looked like it was going well. He just explains in very simple and clear terms why it wasn't and goes through all the problems ahead. He was age 49 and at the height of his academic career at the LSE and then shortly after that switched to spending all his time just reading stuff he was interested in and writing these polemical tracts.
The confusion in his current thinking is that he seems to be saying that all we can do is enjoy and participate in the last remaining enclaves of liberalism and freedom of speech but not actually fight to keep them. But these enclaves exist because people build things and then fight to keep them.
Still can't believe the news about Lisa Cameron defecting.
There have historically been a broad range of political views within the SNP, independence aside.
Lisa Cameron voted against her party on legalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland and on a bill to prevent anti-abortion protests in the vicinity of clinics. So, as with Kate Forbes, I think there's a strong religious conservatism that put her at odds with mainstream SNP views. Her argument is that she was, at best, ostracised by the SNP in Westminster and her constituency due to these views - whether that's wholly correct or whether other clashes were involved, I don't know.
Going Tory rather than just resigning the whip does seem a bit of a pointed FU to her former colleagues, and is quite a stark illustration of one of the major divides in the SNP. Being pro-independence doesn't mean you agree on other things, and that's a real problem for the SNP.
Others have asked on here why she didn't defect to Labour. Possibly it's due to her being closer to the Tories, but I note she was a union rep in her past career. I'd actually not be hugely surprised if she had conversations with Labour - parties don't necessary welcome defectors with open arms where the backstory is problematic, and she wouldn't be the first prospective defector by any means to make a confidential approach and have it politely brushed off.
Of course it may well be the case the Tories reached out to her.
J @Beyond_Topline Let's be honest, the seat she's in now, there's no point defecting to the Tories, there's nothing in her interest to do so. She obviously didn't come cap in hand.
They've given her something, we just don't know what yet.
She could move seat. Alistair Jack and Douglas Ross and are both standing down as MPs
Both seats likely to be lost, but woudl have been worth a go if she had no options.
But from the reporting it does simply appear as suggested to be an FU situation.
They arent likely to be lost. SNP support in areas like that will be cratering, even more than that of the Tories. But I do agree that it is most likely an FU gesture to Yousaf and co.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
I am not sure what your council is like but each one I have lived in treats motoring consultations as box ticking to get to its pre agreed answer and has little interest in what residents or businesses actually want.
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
People can vote against them, and they will presumably lose income in several ways (from parking and from other forms of income) if people are dissuaded from visiting.
There are loads of ways that a Council might make it marginally (or indeed significantly) harder for a visitor to park in an area - they could reduce spaces, expand residents' parking, pedestrianise areas, build affordable housing on a car park, increase charges, reduce maximum stays... are you going to regulate all of them from Westminster and Whitehall as well, or are you just going to have a laser focus on Parliament preventing Chipping Sodbury Council from putting people visiting from Elgin to the minor bother of downloading an app, as if that's the most consequential thing?
There are over 30 parking apps active in the UK. Downloading them all and maintaining them active and up to date is a lot of hassle.
And it is clear from polling that residents do not want this. 59% say they are angry.
Voting the councillors out doesn't really work, as whoever is in charge they are very cash strapped because of lack of central govt funding vs council obligations so chase any short term cash opportunities, however damaging or unpopular.
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
I am not sure what your council is like but each one I have lived in treats motoring consultations as box ticking to get to its pre agreed answer and has little interest in what residents or businesses actually want.
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
People can vote against them, and they will presumably lose income in several ways (from parking and from other forms of income) if people are dissuaded from visiting.
There are loads of ways that a Council might make it marginally (or indeed significantly) harder for a visitor to park in an area - they could reduce spaces, expand residents' parking, pedestrianise areas, build affordable housing on a car park, increase charges, reduce maximum stays... are you going to regulate all of them from Westminster and Whitehall as well, or are you just going to have a laser focus on Parliament preventing Chipping Sodbury Council from putting people visiting from Elgin to the minor bother of downloading an app, as if that's the most consequential thing?
There are over 30 parking apps active in the UK. Downloading them all and maintaining them active and up to date is a lot of hassle.
And it is clear from polling that residents do not want this. 59% say they are angry.
Voting the councillors out doesn't really work, as whoever is in charge they are very cash strapped because of lack of central govt funding vs council obligations so chase any short term cash opportunities, however damaging or unpopular.
I thought there was an announcement recently that there would be a single HMG-sponsored app in the future?
With regard to the cash/cashless economy, perhaps it might be interesting to do a quick thought experiment.....
Suppose that at some time in the future, in the UK, you need to carry out a cash transaction; furthermore, that transaction requires you to receive some coins in change. What do you think the chances are of any of those coins bearing King Charles III's head?
No doubt the Royal Mint will strike King Charles coins, and a few might go into circulation, but most will be collector's proofs and the like. The few that make it into the public domain will be quickly snapped up as souvenirs. There are already so many QEII coins in the marketplace that are doing a perfectly good job that it's probably not worth the Bank of England or the Mint recalling them, other than for standard wear and tear - but that's a diminishing problem because so few people are using coins nowadays....
There's no blinding revelation at the end of this - but I reckon that in all probability I will never see the new King's head on a coin in general circulation. But I did recently buy a book of stamps, which are probably going the same way as the coin of the Realm.
Is Chas on stamps now? Stopped using those a while back - just do click and collect with the postman nowadays.
(P.S. find the prejudice that elderly folk can’t/won’t use contactless bizarre. Why don’t we put our efforts into reducing digital exclusion rather than propping up an obsolete form of barter?)
"Digital exclusion" isn't a clear cut thing.
Are you "digitally excluded" if you refuse to touch Facebook with a 10ft pole?
What if you refuse to install 10 parking apps of unknown provenance and security?
Or you prefer not to bother paying for mobile data that you don't need?
I’d answer No to all of your questions.
However, if you insist on paying cash for everything you certainly ARE digitally excluded because, apart from anything else, you are unable to buy anything online.
Contactless cards are one thing I think - it is when you get to 'apps' that the real problems start.
You might be surprised how many people don't buy things online, though.
Parking apps are evil. Officially.
Govt run car parks and those with over 200 spaces should be obliged to offer at least 2 from 3 out of cash, card and phone options.
Why on earth is a central diktat needed on this sort of stuff?
For private car parks, if people don't find it convenient enough, they don't use it and the operator loses out financially. With Council car parks, it's the same plus people can vote them out.
Public services have been regulated by government throughout my lifetime and many generations before me, with a view to ensuring wide access to them. Car parks should be part of that, and recent changes have been bad for the consumer and wider economy, imo of course.
The key protection on breadth of access is through anti-discrimination legislation. Legislating to require a particular form of access (as opposed to a more general requirement regarding undue discrimination) is a highly inflexible way to go about it that doesn't accept any scope for circumstances differing from place to place, or changing over time.
Changes over time are fine and can be easily implemented.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Why on earth should there be national legislation to provide a trivial benefit to the once in a blue moon visitor, at a cost to the local taxpayer who has to fork out to sustain two payment systems rather than one?
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
I am not sure what your council is like but each one I have lived in treats motoring consultations as box ticking to get to its pre agreed answer and has little interest in what residents or businesses actually want.
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
People can vote against them, and they will presumably lose income in several ways (from parking and from other forms of income) if people are dissuaded from visiting.
There are loads of ways that a Council might make it marginally (or indeed significantly) harder for a visitor to park in an area - they could reduce spaces, expand residents' parking, pedestrianise areas, build affordable housing on a car park, increase charges, reduce maximum stays... are you going to regulate all of them from Westminster and Whitehall as well, or are you just going to have a laser focus on Parliament preventing Chipping Sodbury Council from putting people visiting from Elgin to the minor bother of downloading an app, as if that's the most consequential thing?
There are over 30 parking apps active in the UK. Downloading them all and maintaining them active and up to date is a lot of hassle.
And it is clear from polling that residents do not want this. 59% say they are angry.
Voting the councillors out doesn't really work, as whoever is in charge they are very cash strapped because of lack of central govt funding vs council obligations so chase any short term cash opportunities, however damaging or unpopular.
I thought there was an announcement recently that there would be a single HMG-sponsored app in the future?
Lets hope it isn't developed by the people behind the COVID app....
Comments
Let those who want to live in tower blocks or apartments do so. If people want a home with a garden then they should have one.
Though you can have a home with a garden that is still building up. My house is a three bed semi that takes no more space than my grandparents 1 bed bungalow, because its built over 2 stories. Some people like 3 stories now too.
The family of Robert Davis, 19, who is accused of killing local journalist Josh Kruger, said that Davis was just 15 when he and Kruger began a years-long relationship involving drugs — and that Davis told them Kruger was threatening to post sexually explicit videos of him online before, police say, Davis shot Kruger.
https://www.inquirer.com/crime/josh-kruger-robert-davis-philadelphia-shooting-20231011.html
Incidentally, near me there has been the following hilarity: different sections of what may (IMV) reasonably appear to be the same car park, run by different companies.
"Drivers left confused after being hit with parking fines at St Neots car park despite buying ticket"
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/drivers-express-confusion-after-being-27657513
West Bank has to be out of the question, there's no point getting them out of one part only for them to turn back up in another, Israel would need to do the same to the West Bank if that's where they go.
Michael Shanks MP
@mgshanks
We’ve all said it, here’s the proof. Vote SNP, get Tory.
But soon East Kilbride will have the chance to vote for real change with a Labour Government and a brilliant MP in
@JoaniReid
.
But it's still possible to live in a three-story townhouse and have a (tiny) garden and garage. As I, and my neighbours, have.
I totally agree. Those who want to live in a flat should ideally have the option. The problem - which was the point of my post - is that too few people do. The dream is for a starter home to be a nice detached (or, at a push, semi) on a pleasant cul-de-sac, with garage and garden.
Until that 'dream' alters, we'll have these problems with flats.
Neither the West Bank or Jordan will want them as they fked up the countries before
An MP has defected from the SNP to join the Conservatives amid accusations of "toxic and bullying" treatment from Westminster colleagues.
Dr Lisa Cameron, the MP for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow since 2015, criticised her treatment by the SNP and its leadership after she spoke out about her colleague, Patrick Grady.
Mr Grady was suspended from the House of Commons for two days last year after he was found to have made an "unwanted sexual advance" to a member of party staff in 2016.
Dr Cameron said she was mistreated by her party after speaking in support of the complainant.
The MP said that she received support from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in recent weeks after opening up about the deterioration of her mental health that led to her being put on antidepressants.
However, she claimed she had received no contact from the SNP leadership.
If few people want to live in flats, that's not a problem whatsoever. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that starter homes can't be semi detached with a garden. Just need to build enough of them.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on the atrocities he's seen committed by Hamas against Israelis:
"A baby riddled with bullets, soldiers beheaded, young people burned alive... It's depravity in the worst imaginable way."
https://x.com/YWNReporter/status/1712509086623789452?s=20
Did The Times have its dinner money stolen by the SNP? It's certainly taken on the main never done whining about the nasty Nats mantle from all the other organs who have been enthusiastic SNP bashers up to now.
But I do think he refuses to accept the reality of Hamas's explicitly genocidal approach to Israel and Jews. Nor has he come up with any possible alternative to what Israel should do. Which comes pretty close to saying that Israel should not defend itself at all. Self-defence is lawful and is also morally right. A state has a duty to defend its citizens.
We should be arguing about the how not the whether. There is no easy answer to this. But it would be a lot easier if Hamas and Egypt allowed civilians to leave. That they won't suggests to me that they want innocent Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to use this a stick with which to beat Israel. The moral repulsiveness of this should be called out.
I rather fear that far too many are in the Israel must not do anything at all camp. The consequences of that are existential for Israel and Jews. Effectively forbidding a country from defending itself is repellent. We did it to Bosnian Muslims when we denied them arms and then wrung our hands when Srebenicza happened. We should not now make the same mistake again.
But if it is a closer election than currently appears to be the case, it's perfectly possible. Indeed, Ruth Davidson's Scottish Tories making 12 gains in 2017 absolutely saved May's hide - essentially she'd have been on 305 seats but for those gains, the DUP wouldn't have been an option for her and, whilst it wouldn't have put Corbyn in Number 10 immediately as he'd not have had a route either, May would certainly have been out two years before she was and there would have very likely been a further election in 2017. An interesting counterfactual.
“ Dr Cameron has said she will stand down at the next general election, which is expected next year, according to Mr Ross.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-67087840
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/10/12/england-australia-minute-silence-wembley-arch-israel-hamas/
For example.
https://www.flowbird.group/flowbird-group-acquires-yourparkingspace/
https://ringgo.co.uk/easypark-group-intends-to-acquire-park-now-group/
A shame that the acquirers tend to be crappier than the companies they acquire, but it will sort itself out….. eventually.
Contrary to what some are claiming they did not want to lose Gaza.
Their intention was to destroy the Saudi-Israel peace talks (mission accomplished) and they thought that the US and the rest of the West would hold Israel back from taking the fight to Hamas in Gaza.
They wanted to have their cake and eat it too, it could be said.
They were wrong. America and Europe are quite rightly not holding Israel back. Israel is right to, and entitled to, destroy Hamas.
Noted with thanks.
I remember a spat he had with former Graun journalist Michael White. He just makes awful accusations and shoots from the hip. How he keeps getting work is a mystery if he is like this all the time.
The worst sort of Nepo Child.
Variations from place to place are the problem. Someone who lives in Birmingham but visits Portsmouth once and wants to be able to park there shouldnt be required to download an app specific to council car parks in Portsmouth to do so. It is silly and disrupts trade, regardless of any kick back benefit to the council.
Biden says ‘respect for international law’ imperative as UN warns the humanitarian situation is deteriorating for Palestinians
...
President Joe Biden said Israel had a right to respond to the attacks by Hamas, the worst in its 75-year history, but warned its retaliatory action must be “according to the rule of law”.
...
US Secretary of State [Blinken] said it is “our respect for international law and the laws of war” that “separates Israel, the US and other democracies” from Hamas and terrorist groups that engage in “heinous” activities.
He added: “We know that Israel will take all of the precautions that it can” to avoid civilian casualties, “just as we would”.
Jens Stoltenberg, Nato’s secretary general, echoed the call on Wednesday, urging a “proportionate” Israeli response that protected “innocent civilian lives”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/11/us-israel-gaza-biden-netanyahu-palestine-onslaught-hamas/ (£££)
Also, if you are willing to say which outlets are approved to report on Scottish matters that would be useful, though obviously you're under no obligation to do so.
That might all be a bit grubby, but it isn't cash in brown envelopes.
But from the reporting it does simply appear as suggested to be an FU situation.
What did I say yesterday, quoting Lt. Saavik?: "Humor, it is a difficult concept. It is not logical."
There was some sophistication to the attack.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/jul/23/mediamonkey
Worth a listen.
If Portsmouth decide, in consultation with residents and businesses, that it's worth having two forms of pavement (and I note your suggestion is this is in EVERY public parking location with a fee to pay), that's for them. If not, that's also for them.
Likely too that they have been trained in urban defensive warfare. We have seen in Ukraine how destructive and costly in terms of blood that is.
As someone else said it’s amazing he’s not been canned. Others have been for far less.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4561435#Comment_4561435
Hamas has played a blinder. Netanyahu's reputation as pro-Trump, pro-Putin anti-democratic maniac has been glaringly exposed to the world in recent times. Israel won't get a shred of sympathy. In terms of propaganda, Hamas holds all the cards here.
Sisi’s reluctance to accept a million or more refugees is possibly more motivated by a fear for his own position. It’s not a simple matter of opening the crossing point, even if (for example) the US or others were to provide funding for the refugees.
There’s also the awkward fact that most Palestinians, whether they support Hamas or not, might still choose not to leave. That’s unknowable - but a Palestinian journalist interviewed at length on PM this evening said that was the case with almost everyone she’d asked.
You’re right, of course, that Hamas are probably quite happy to see mass casualties to advance their cause, or even intend as much.
Thereby explaining why she has not found a life partner, marriage is supposed to be a commitment to partnership and caring for another for life, not another act of self love for social media
And I don't think being able to park without having to download a local parking app is a trivial benefit, but a perfectly reasonable expectation.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12623843/Israel-releases-images-babies-murdered-burned-Hamas-verified-photos-beheaded-terrorists-confirmed-local-media-IDF-drops-Gaza-leaflets-telling-citizens-flee.html
We party regularly in the communal gardens and generally support one another and have a good life. My daughters are delighted. It's like sheltered housing but not full of oldies.
I mean, seriously, look at what you wrote - a petty whinge about the paper reporting on the story without any mention of whether there is any substance to the story, or if it is in fact a complete nonsense.
And since you react very negatively to anyone you don't approve of commenting on scottish political matters, deriding their ignorance, why wouldn't you expect people to ask for your view, since you condemn anyone commenting without sufficient knowledge? We're not allowed to comment or hold opinions without having proper knowledge of the area it seems, and The Times cannot be trusted apparentlt, so what should we believe? Obviously not the Times apparently.
Help a non-expect out, please? You got mad at the Times for reporting on it so you cannot pretend you don't care at all about it. I'm genuinely curious if its a manufactured row or if its got substance to it.
There are loads of ways that a Council might make it marginally (or indeed significantly) harder for a visitor to park in an area - they could reduce spaces, expand residents' parking, pedestrianise areas, build affordable housing on a car park, increase charges, reduce maximum stays... are you going to regulate all of them from Westminster and Whitehall as well, or are you just going to have a laser focus on Parliament preventing Chipping Sodbury Council from putting people visiting from Elgin to the minor bother of downloading an app, as if that's the most consequential thing?
As difficult as it be, there can be no comeback for Hamas after this, they have crossed the line and need to be completely and utterly vanquished.
This sort of behaviour is simply intolerable, and it is existential and proportionate for Israel to end it.
I'd rather have a private garden. I have warm relations with my neighbours, but I wouldn't want to share a garden with them any more than a living room.
The key is personal choice. Everyone should be free to choose.
He wants to offer succour to America's traditional enemies, and scorn America's allies.
Exclusive: Government's anti-Semitism adviser Lord Mann has castigated football’s governing body, calling decision “a failure of leadership”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/10/12/fa-wembley-arch-israel-hamas-jewish-lord-john-mann-england/
And since non-experts cannot comment themselves or ask for comment from experts, apparently, I'd like to come to a view somehow at least, so I can privately condemn or acquit in my own mind.
Also, remember that whinging about papers you don't like is only worth mocking when right wing loons do it. When you do it it is fully justified of course (drawing attention to it is probably going to be labelled as obsessive or something, because 2-3 comments is obsession).
The confusion in his current thinking is that he seems to be saying that all we can do is enjoy and participate in the last remaining enclaves of liberalism and freedom of speech but not actually fight to keep them. But these enclaves exist because people build things and then fight to keep them.
And it is clear from polling that residents do not want this. 59% say they are angry.
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motoring-news/drivers-accuse-councils-swapping-parking-payment-with-apps/
Voting the councillors out doesn't really work, as whoever is in charge they are very cash strapped because of lack of central govt funding vs council obligations so chase any short term cash opportunities, however damaging or unpopular.