I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
Juncker always was a prat on such things. Google the reason why he was removed as PM of Luxembourg if you want to see a really dodgy story.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
There was talk of Dimbledee going a few years back and it concluded Anne McEvoy was the chosen one.May not be the case now but at around 20-1 may be worth a small punt.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
Juncker always was a prat on such things. Google the reason why he was removed as PM of Luxembourg if you want to see a really dodgy story.
Would that be legal if the link tax comes in?
Well, if Google is allowed to keep operating yes.
Whether it would be able to I don't know. Possibly not in Europe.
It is ironic to reflect that if this goes ahead Brexit might just be the salvation of our university system. Any university that can't use internet search engines is going to be at a huge disadvantage. It will wreck the French system for a start.
The Customs Union will be the next big clash. Not sure who will lead the remain camp, unless Grieve manages to somehow rebuild his position by then.
Forgetting to mention, that Grieve's name is on the customs amendment coming up, along with others. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role he plays next time.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
It would depend on the company. The Independent may decide not to. But the larger media companies have been pushing for this as they will then charge for links to their news sites. It means that any website such as PB will have to ban links or will risk being in breach of the law.
The Customs Union will be the next big clash. Not sure who will lead the remain camp, unless Grieve manages to somehow rebuild his position by then.
Forgetting to mention, that Grieve's name is on the customs amendment coming up, along with others. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role he plays next time.
Has not the customs union been voted down a few times?
The Customs Union will be the next big clash. Not sure who will lead the remain camp, unless Grieve manages to somehow rebuild his position by then.
Forgetting to mention, that Grieve's name is on the customs amendment coming up, along with others. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role he plays next time.
Has not the customs union been voted down a few times?
Yes, but this is a cross party amendment tabled by Clarke and Soubry. Theresa's next bit of fun.
The Customs Union will be the next big clash. Not sure who will lead the remain camp, unless Grieve manages to somehow rebuild his position by then.
Forgetting to mention, that Grieve's name is on the customs amendment coming up, along with others. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role he plays next time.
Has not the customs union been voted down a few times?
Kirsty Wark is rabidly unionist (even the BBC were obliged to reprimand her for an inappropriate overly robust questioning of Salmond), she is Scottish, and would therefore go a little way to shoring up the justification for declaring QT as managed and chargeable to Scotland in spite of it recently having gone 12 weeks and therefore 60 panellists without a single representative from the third party in Westminster.
A good bet, I would say :-)
At least when QT is held in Scotland, you get Scottish politicians & guests.
The farce in Caernarfon on 14 June had John Mann, Isabel Oakeshott, Dominic Grieve and Matthew Wright on Question Time.
Oh, and they added Leanne Wood as the final panelist as the token Welsh representative.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
Your Venerable Majesty
For normal men, it may be impossible.
For those of us with eight foot horns on our organ, it's just a matter of touching it at the right moment...
Edit - I was going to make a pun on pipes and three fiddlers, but that would be smutty.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
And while he was at it he also shafted the country and the Tory party. A record of failure that has probably never been equalled by any previous PM.
The Houses of Parliament are the cocaine capital of London as is London the cocaine capital of Europe.Cocaine is widely found in rivers, with particularly high concentrations near London’s Houses of Parliament, National Geographic reports.
Basically,a number of members the Houses of Lords and the Commons must be coke-heads,not forgetting the old whisky soaks,and these addicts are the same people who deny patients ,including children ,appropriate prescribed cannabis medication by their stupid laws.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
Your Venerable Majesty
For normal men, it may be impossible.
For those of us with eight foot horns on our organ, it's just a matter of touching it at the right moment...
When you are playing your Organ do you have a fan club of Church Supermodels egging you on?
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
Your Venerable Majesty
For normal men, it may be impossible.
For those of us with eight foot horns on our organ, it's just a matter of touching it at the right moment...
When you are playing your Organ do you have a fan club of Church Supermodels egging you on?
I should be so lucky.
When I play wrong notes I sometimes get egged by superannuated choirmembers and that's as close as I get.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
Your Venerable Majesty
For normal men, it may be impossible.
For those of us with eight foot horns on our organ, it's just a matter of touching it at the right moment...
When you are playing your Organ do you have a fan club of Church Supermodels egging you on?
I should be so lucky.
When I play wrong notes I sometimes get egged by superannuated choirmembers and that's as close as I get.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
And while he was at it he also shafted the country and the Tory party. A record of failure that has probably never been equalled by any previous PM.
Now come on. Let's not get carried away. Chamberlain and Goderich were both far more impressive.
The Customs Union will be the next big clash. Not sure who will lead the remain camp, unless Grieve manages to somehow rebuild his position by then.
Forgetting to mention, that Grieve's name is on the customs amendment coming up, along with others. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role he plays next time.
Has not the customs union been voted down a few times?
Yes, but this is a cross party amendment tabled by Clarke and Soubry. Theresa's next bit of fun.
Well Clarke and Soubry have been super loyal to May. If they look like rebelling then whatever could happen next?
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Totally agree mr tyndall .That was the real reason for GDPR in the first place so an anti EU marketing campaign would be illegal. Not that many noticed!
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
Juncker always was a prat on such things. Google the reason why he was removed as PM of Luxembourg if you want to see a really dodgy story.
Would that be legal if the link tax comes in?
Well, if Google is allowed to keep operating yes.
Whether it would be able to I don't know. Possibly not in Europe.
It is ironic to reflect that if this goes ahead Brexit might just be the salvation of our university system. Any university that can't use internet search engines is going to be at a huge disadvantage. It will wreck the French system for a start.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
And while he was at it he also shafted the country and the Tory party. A record of failure that has probably never been equalled by any previous PM.
Now come on. Let's not get carried away. Chamberlain and Goderich were both far more impressive.
At least Chamberlain handed over to someone competent.
The Customs Union will be the next big clash. Not sure who will lead the remain camp, unless Grieve manages to somehow rebuild his position by then.
Forgetting to mention, that Grieve's name is on the customs amendment coming up, along with others. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role he plays next time.
Has not the customs union been voted down a few times?
Yes, but this is a cross party amendment tabled by Clarke and Soubry. Theresa's next bit of fun.
Well Clarke and Soubry have been super loyal to May. If they look like rebelling then whatever could happen next?
Soubry hasn't recovered from, or accepted, the Brexit vote.
Clarke is just sticking to his guns. He's strayed into territory where if he looked around he'd find himself on the wrong side of his own fence. He'll work that out eventually.
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Totally agree mr tyndall .That was the real reason for GDPR in the first place so an anti EU marketing campaign would be illegal. Not that many noticed!
You know, I have been over almost all of the GDPR. I must have missed that bit.
It's a really crap piece of legislation, drafted by people with minimal contact with the real world who don't ever seem to have been in business. It makes our economy less competitive, it increases bureaucracy and it increases the cost of services for us all for no obvious benefit. Really, really stupid. But it does not prevent marketing for or against the EU.
If anyone gets the chance to go and see David Byrne in concert do so - particularly if you are a fan of the old Talking Heads stuff. It is a quite remarkable performance. NME described it as "what may just be the best live show of all time".
We were lucky enough to be right down at the front last night and it was just mesmerising.
I saw him a few years back. A great live performer.
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
Did you think the Britain Stronger in campaign was xenophobic?
No.
So David Cameron standing up in front of the cameras and saying unless you vote to remain hordes of brown skinned animals will invade Kent and set up a jungle there, is perfectly acceptable to you. This is not racism/xenophobia?
Cameron has a great deal to answer for. Haing shafted Nick Clegg he then achieved the almost impossible feat of shafting himself.
And while he was at it he also shafted the country and the Tory party. A record of failure that has probably never been equalled by any previous PM.
Now come on. Let's not get carried away. Chamberlain and Goderich were both far more impressive.
At least Chamberlain handed over to someone competent.
Did he? I thought he handed over to Winston Churchill of Dardanelles, Gold Standard and 'half-naked fakir' fame?
Cyclefree, yes you were equivocating. I asked you a simple question, whether you thought the Leave campaign was xenophobic, which you failed to answer. You intimated you had not registered the campaign, a claim which bears no scrutiny. You dressed this non-answer up in swathes of quasi-intellectual waffle.
Elliot, you are a flake. Buy a decent map. Plot a better route. You’ll be amazed by the difference in air quality when you eschew the obvious highways.
Josias, of course it can be done. Don’t be ridiculous. Adopt Pulpstar’s idea and simply charge by the mile as the crow flies if necessary. I laugh in the face of rail people arguing that simplifying fares cannot be done.
Another Nick. Quite right. The UK’s best and most popular railway is nationalised. Surely this cannot be?
The fact that you cannot be bothered to read what I have written on the subject is your problem. I said that I paid no attention to the Leave campaign on immigration because it - FoM - was not an issue which registered as a concern with me. So don’t inaccurately descibe what I have written.
"Given that the only men presenters of the programme since it was first broadcast have been man then that is, surely, a strong case for a woman to take this on".
Any talk of an impending EU superstate even in response to Trump's excesses will only reinforce in Leavers' minds that their choice was the right one.
There seems no chance of a superstate. What many Europhiles favour is an eventual federation.
There is a difference.
The USA, Canada, Australia, Switzerland and some others are federations. France is a superstate.
That really is splitting hairs though.
All four of the examples you cite are single countries, which is precisely the point.
How about the UK? It contains more than one country, as the World Cup reminds us.
I'm not sure if the UK is a true federation. But under US 'states' rights' my understanding is that unless sovereignty on a matter was very specifically passed to the federal government a state isn't prevented from passing its own legislation. California has state air pollution regulations which differ from other states. In some ways, that's slightly more decentralised than the EU.
I fail to see a problem if a federal country has elected levels of government, elaborate checks and balances, written constitution, etc. The EU parliament is elected by PR. In that respect it's superior to ours which isn't.
Yes, but the Federal Government uses the "Interstate Commerce" clause of the constitution to legislate on far more than the Founders originally planned.
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
It would depend on the company. The Independent may decide not to. But the larger media companies have been pushing for this as they will then charge for links to their news sites. It means that any website such as PB will have to ban links or will risk being in breach of the law.
But if you’ve paid to subscribe to a newspaper and then send the link to someone else who has paid to view it, what then? Is that going to be forbidden?
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Totally agree mr tyndall .That was the real reason for GDPR in the first place so an anti EU marketing campaign would be illegal. Not that many noticed!
You know, I have been over almost all of the GDPR. I must have missed that bit.
It's a really crap piece of legislation, drafted by people with minimal contact with the real world who don't ever seem to have been in business. It makes our economy less competitive, it increases bureaucracy and it increases the cost of services for us all for no obvious benefit. Really, really stupid. But it does not prevent marketing for or against the EU.
I've not been clear on what it is supposed to prevent really. My understanding was that human error was behind most data breaches and poor data management and record keeping, and increasing the bureaucracy of it doesn't seem like it will fix that.
We just had a friend nip around for a cup of tea, and a few minutes after she had left she was back with a flat tyre.
A couple of things that interested me:
*) I haven't had to change a tyre for twenty years, and neither Mrs J or our guest had ever changed one. In that time I've probably done 200,000+ miles Are flat tyres a lot less common than they were (perhaps due to improved tyre belts)?
*) Space saver tyres are weird and unholy (pun intended).
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
We just had a friend nip around for a cup of tea, and a few minutes after she had left she was back with a flat tyre.
A couple of things that interested me:
*) I haven't had to change a tyre for twenty years, and neither Mrs J or our guest had ever changed one. In that time I've probably done 200,000+ miles Are flat tyres a lot less common than they were (perhaps due to improved tyre belts)?
*) Space saver tyres are weird and unholy (pun intended).
I know it's a bugger to get them off when they do go flat, due to the tightness of the nuts when they're put on.
I think I've changed one tyre in the last ten years. I've also had a slow puncture that I got the tyre place to deal with (in fact I've got another one now I need to get sorted).
I think they are less common. Maybe smoother road surfaces and fewer glass bottles have an effect as well?
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
It would depend on the company. The Independent may decide not to. But the larger media companies have been pushing for this as they will then charge for links to their news sites. It means that any website such as PB will have to ban links or will risk being in breach of the law.
Seems incredible undemocratic and a major violation of both free speech and the ability to share news critical of government's.
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
BINO would cause some weird political combustions. Daniel Hannan's eyes would open so wide they'd take up half his face.
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
We just had a friend nip around for a cup of tea, and a few minutes after she had left she was back with a flat tyre.
A couple of things that interested me:
*) I haven't had to change a tyre for twenty years, and neither Mrs J or our guest had ever changed one. In that time I've probably done 200,000+ miles Are flat tyres a lot less common than they were (perhaps due to improved tyre belts)?
*) Space saver tyres are weird and unholy (pun intended).
I know it's a bugger to get them off when they do go flat, due to the tightness of the nuts when they're put on.
I think I've changed one tyre in the last ten years. I've also had a slow puncture that I got the tyre place to deal with (in fact I've got another one now I need to get sorted).
I think they are less common. Maybe smoother road surfaces and fewer glass bottles have an effect as well?
Not only that, but cars in general are far more reliable. The hard shoulders used to be littered with breakdowns - you hardly ever see one nowadays.
My car has managed about 40,000 miles with almost nothing done to it. My bike, on the other hand, in the 1,500 miles or so I've done on it in the year and a bit since I bought it has had three punctures and needed a new chain, new brake blocks and a new cassette. It needs a service about every 500 miles. It's as expensive as buying petrol for a car.
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Would FrancisUrquhart having linked to what the EU has done on the Independent website be illegal?
In which case how would people scrutinise their government if sharing news is illegal? Seems very dodgy.
It would depend on the company. The Independent may decide not to. But the larger media companies have been pushing for this as they will then charge for links to their news sites. It means that any website such as PB will have to ban links or will risk being in breach of the law.
Seems incredible undemocratic and a major violation of both free speech and the ability to share news critical of government's.
Or news supportive of the government. Or any news at all.
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
BINO isn't available precisely because we will be rule takers. The EU will set the rules not particularly to our advantage. But we need to sign up to the rules if we are going to carry on roughly as at present. No deal is the absence of an arrangement and is therefore unsustainable. Actually a deal is entirely reachable but we need to understand that it is relative to nothing, not relative to the status quo. The negotiating space between better than nothing and as good as what we had is a big one. I am pretty sure we will end up in the middle: much better than nothing but much worse than what we had. That isn't BINO however.
We just had a friend nip around for a cup of tea, and a few minutes after she had left she was back with a flat tyre.
A couple of things that interested me:
*) I haven't had to change a tyre for twenty years, and neither Mrs J or our guest had ever changed one. In that time I've probably done 200,000+ miles Are flat tyres a lot less common than they were (perhaps due to improved tyre belts)?
*) Space saver tyres are weird and unholy (pun intended).
I know it's a bugger to get them off when they do go flat, due to the tightness of the nuts when they're put on.
I think I've changed one tyre in the last ten years. I've also had a slow puncture that I got the tyre place to deal with (in fact I've got another one now I need to get sorted).
I think they are less common. Maybe smoother road surfaces and fewer glass bottles have an effect as well?
Not only that, but cars in general are far more reliable. The hard shoulders used to be littered with breakdowns - you hardly ever see one nowadays.
My car has managed about 40,000 miles with almost nothing done to it. My bike, on the other hand, in the 1,500 miles or so I've done on it in the year and a bit since I bought it has had three punctures and needed a new chain, new brake blocks and a new cassette. It needs a service about every 500 miles. It's as expensive as buying petrol for a car.
That's nothing. I walk, and I need servicing about every 20-25 miles. with a bit of fuel and a long rest to cool down - I'm so unreliable that I should really trade myself in and buy a newer model ...
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
I seemed to remember this came about because German and Spanish media organisations spat their dummy that google “news” was basically cribbing the headline and the first paragraph, claimed they were losing views and they eventually got them banned from doing it there...then they realised their traffic went through the floor.
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
If there is still FOM it won’t....
There's FOM, and there's FOM.
I suspect that you could have a situation like US-Canada, where for a Canadian to work in the US, they need to find an employer who's willing to go on-line, register as an employer who hires Canadians, fill out an on-line form, and the Canadian needs to be criminal record free. It's essentially FoM, except that for low skilled/wage jobs, especially ones that pay by the hour and where the employee might not be around for long, most businesses can't be bothered. But, if you're hiring a software developer and paying $100k, it's hoop that people will jump through.
That would probably satisfy a substantial minority, and if it didn't restrict immigration enough, you could limit it to certain sectors, or have minimum salary or qualifications requirements.
We just had a friend nip around for a cup of tea, and a few minutes after she had left she was back with a flat tyre.
A couple of things that interested me:
*) I haven't had to change a tyre for twenty years, and neither Mrs J or our guest had ever changed one. In that time I've probably done 200,000+ miles Are flat tyres a lot less common than they were (perhaps due to improved tyre belts)?
*) Space saver tyres are weird and unholy (pun intended).
Had a puncture last year in Ireland and couldn't fix it because couldn't find locking wheel nut key. AA man fixed it by finding hole, pushing in through hole what looked like a 12 in strip torn off a black plastic bin liner, reflating tyre. He said that was a perfectly good permanent repair.
Most annoying thing about all this was I told the hire company they were useless and they told me it is their deliberate policy not to put the key thingy in the car, and that I had signed a bit of paper acknowledging there wasn't one. My mind is still boggling about this, but because I had a plane to catch I never found out why.
Anyone else get the feeling that everyone is just going through the motions at the moment until the storm hits later in the year. I had previously thought that TM could pull off Brexit but there is only so much under performance possible. Events will start to overtake her and I cant see her lasting the year anymore.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
BINO isn't available precisely because we will be rule takers. The EU will set the rules not particularly to our advantage. But we need to sign up to the rules if we are going to carry on roughly as at present. No deal is the absence of an arrangement and is therefore unsustainable. Actually a deal is entirely reachable but we need to understand that it is relative to nothing, not relative to the status quo. The negotiating space between better than nothing and as good as what we had is a big one. I am pretty sure we will end up in the middle: much better than nothing but much worse than what we had. That isn't BINO however.
I don't think we will get BINO (though if we do get a deal some will call it that - we had nonsense right from the start about what constituted 'true' Brexit as if only one way could be that), just that in theory it would command enough support - but there was no path to thatm nor would it necessarily be a good idea.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Totally agree mr tyndall .That was the real reason for GDPR in the first place so an anti EU marketing campaign would be illegal. Not that many noticed!
You know, I have been over almost all of the GDPR. I must have missed that bit.
It's a really crap piece of legislation, drafted by people with minimal contact with the real world who don't ever seem to have been in business. It makes our economy less competitive, it increases bureaucracy and it increases the cost of services for us all for no obvious benefit. Really, really stupid. But it does not prevent marketing for or against the EU.
I've not been clear on what it is supposed to prevent really. My understanding was that human error was behind most data breaches and poor data management and record keeping, and increasing the bureaucracy of it doesn't seem like it will fix that.
It’s designed to prevent the abuse of your personal data by companies which collate big data sets and either use them themselves or sell them to others. Rather than focus on this abuse it has got every small business, charity, school and organisation going mental wasting time developing policies for data they often didn’t even appreciate they had, let alone made any attempt to monetise. An astonishing waste of resources.
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
And how do we know the difference? How does the average pb poster (or even Plato) know which links we can post and which we cannot? Google can no doubt have a list but most people and most sites are not Google.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
And how do we know the difference? How does the average pb poster (or even Plato) know which links we can post and which we cannot? Google can no doubt have a list but most people and most sites are not Google.
There'll be a plugin for Vanilla/Wordpress/etc. within about 12 hours of the link tax existing that will strip out links to 'taxable' content. Google will probably provide it as a web service, because it maximises the pain that will be felt by those who attempt to charge.
Who says parliamentary procedural language can get confusing?
Message from the Commons
That they agree to certain amendments made by the Lords in lieu of amendments made by the Lords to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill to which they disagreed.
They agree to the amendment made by the Lords to their amendment made in lieu of an amendment made by the Lords to which they disagreed.
And they agree to the amendments made by the Lords to their amendments made in lieu of the amendment made by the Lords to which they disagreed with amendments to which they desire the agreement of your Lordships.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
I believe you mean "one trust helping the government with its goal of reducing pensions payments as a percentage of GDP."
I have been going on about this for months. This site would be in big trouble for a start as it would be a breach of the rules for any of us to post links to news items on other websites.
Totally agree mr tyndall .That was the real reason for GDPR in the first place so an anti EU marketing campaign would be illegal. Not that many noticed!
You know, I have been over almost all of the GDPR. I must have missed that bit.
It's a really crap piece of legislation, drafted by people with minimal contact with the real world who don't ever seem to have been in business. It makes our economy less competitive, it increases bureaucracy and it increases the cost of services for us all for no obvious benefit. Really, really stupid. But it does not prevent marketing for or against the EU.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
I believe you mean "one trust helping the government with its goal of reducing pensions payments as a percentage of GDP."
Or “one trust killing people. For free, unlike those profiteering Dignitas people.”
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
And how do we know the difference? How does the average pb poster (or even Plato) know which links we can post and which we cannot? Google can no doubt have a list but most people and most sites are not Google.
A few years ago in America some news websites started suing forums where their articles had been quoted upon. It was quite common to quote in full an article and link back to it and these sites started suing as quoting in full is a breach of copyright. They would trace back through the links to find who to sue.
At a forum I posted in and was a moderator of the admin added the domain name of these sites to the site's swear word filter list. If anyone attempted to link to that news site then the domain name would be asterisked out.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
I believe you mean "one trust helping the government with its goal of reducing pensions payments as a percentage of GDP."
Or “one trust killing people. For free, unlike those profiteering Dignitas people.”
The Gosport cases were between 1988 and 2000, so mostly occurred more than 2 decades ago.
Lessons to be learned, but much may have been superseded by current practice.
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
And how do we know the difference? How does the average pb poster (or even Plato) know which links we can post and which we cannot? Google can no doubt have a list but most people and most sites are not Google.
A few years ago in America some news websites started suing forums where their articles had been quoted upon. It was quite common to quote in full an article and link back to it and these sites started suing as quoting in full is a breach of copyright. They would trace back through the links to find who to sue.
At a forum I posted in and was a moderator of the admin added the domain name of these sites to the site's swear word filter list. If anyone attempted to link to that news site then the domain name would be asterisked out.
People on a certain gaming forum I know go too far the other way: if an article criticises their game, they'll copy large tracts of the text and not link to the original article as they don't want the organisation that has dared criticise their game to get ad revenue.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
From BBC News: “ there was an institutionalised practice of shortening lives”.
An institutionalised practice of killing, in other words.
Shocking. Really shocking.
Mark Easton is giving the NHS both barrels on its culture of placing its reputation above the interests of its patients and not taking whistleblowers seriously:
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
It depends what you mean by "prematurely".
I used to be a real dick at university, and would ask people - in an apprently sincere tone - about what they thought about post natal abortion, or capital punishment in schools.
The storm hitting is an important step in resolving the Brexit contradictions. Which necessarily will be resolved as nothing exists in a vacuum. As long as things coast along the contradictions can be denied, as demonstrated by today's vote in the Commons. I expect we will end up with a lot less out of the EU relationship, at a similar monetary cost and a higher cost in jobs, prosperity and opportunities. At the same time we will lose a big say over what happens to us. It's a dumb deal. I hate to speak for Leavers, but I suspect they will be OK with it as we will be out of the hated EU, while Remainers will be relieved it's not worse.
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
A BINO frankly would probably command a majority in the country, if most remainers would be happy with the INO part and enough Leavers were satisfied with the B part. Obviously neither of those will be true completely, and for all the talk of things being soft it doesn't seem like if there is a deal (I still put that as less likely than no deal, personally) it will be INO as it could be.
If there is still FOM it won’t....
There's FOM, and there's FOM.
I suspect that you could have a situation like US-Canada, where for a Canadian to work in the US, they need to find an employer who's willing to go on-line, register as an employer who hires Canadians, fill out an on-line form, and the Canadian needs to be criminal record free. It's essentially FoM, except that for low skilled/wage jobs, especially ones that pay by the hour and where the employee might not be around for long, most businesses can't be bothered. But, if you're hiring a software developer and paying $100k, it's hoop that people will jump through.
That would probably satisfy a substantial minority, and if it didn't restrict immigration enough, you could limit it to certain sectors, or have minimum salary or qualifications requirements.
The TN visa is rather more limited than you describe: for instance only a defined list of occupations are eligible and software developer is not one of them. Of course in practice you’ll run across plenty of Canadian software devs in any US tech company, but if you look up their job titles you’ll find they’ve been hired as “systems analysts” or some other occupation that is on the list.
The problem is that if trade relations with Canada deteriorate further, it’s going to be pretty tempting for the Trump administration to start auditing Canadian TN holders to see if they really are doing the job they were hired for.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
I believe you mean "one trust helping the government with its goal of reducing pensions payments as a percentage of GDP."
Or “one trust killing people. For free, unlike those profiteering Dignitas people.”
The Gosport cases were between 1988 and 2000, so mostly occurred more than 2 decades ago.
Lessons to be learned, but much may have been superseded by current practice.
Genuine question: do you think there is a good whistleblowing culture now within the NHS?
The fact that it has taken so long to uncover this and that there has been no effective action taken against those responsible would tend to suggest not. And if so can we really say that lessons have been learnt?
Cyclefree, not really. You said you quite like FOM (fair enough). You then added that you paid little attention to the Leave campaign, and were away for the last week. Are you honestly claiming that you managed to avoid coverage of the Leave campaign - a global news story - to such an degree that in all truth you are not able to form an opinion on its content?
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
I believe you mean "one trust helping the government with its goal of reducing pensions payments as a percentage of GDP."
Or “one trust killing people. For free, unlike those profiteering Dignitas people.”
The Gosport cases were between 1988 and 2000, so mostly occurred more than 2 decades ago.
Lessons to be learned, but much may have been superseded by current practice.
That is rather dismissive. Some in the NHS face very seriouus allegations and let's hope there is justice for the families
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
The point of the law is to disallow opt out. No one gets to opt out of receiving the tax.
But as I understand it it is not a tax on links, but would be a tax on links plus summary/extract.
From BBC News: “ there was an institutionalised practice of shortening lives”.
An institutionalised practice of killing, in other words.
Shocking. Really shocking.
Mark Easton is giving the NHS both barrels on its culture of placing its reputation above the interests of its patients and not taking whistleblowers seriously:
“A long-standing and dangerous weakness”.
Don't, with respect, be silly. The facts as we know them so far are equally consistent with an institutionalised practice of not pointlessly prolonging lives at the expense of unnecessary suffering. Evidence first, verdict afterwards is an absolutely cracking arrangement.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
It depends what you mean by "prematurely".
If someone is given doses of painkillers for no good medical reason and die as a result, that is a premature death, to my mind.
RCS wrote Anazina is right about one thing: London is significantly smaller than people think, and walking around the central bits is almost always the quickest way to get around. I used to work on St James's Street in the West End, and for anything nearer than St Paul's in the City, I would walk. It would take me 30 minutes, and I'd know my arrival time to the minute, rather than taking a lottery with the tube or a taxi.
—-
London is a big city but the truth is that humans can cover ground quickly. As you say, if the journey is under two and a half miles, walk it. You see more, get there reliably on time, keep fit, and can make private calls while walking. Why people use the tube for short trips is beyond me.
It has been abundantly clear for some time that we aren't willing to pay more for the armed forces, not to the significant degree many things would require. In fairness is there much money left once we pay for all the white elephant schemes?
Apparently all our spare money is going on the NHS. In a week when there has been a report about one trust ending prematurely the lives of between 450 and 600 people.
It depends what you mean by "prematurely".
If someone is given doses of painkillers for no good medical reason and die as a result, that is a premature death, to my mind.
Do you have some other definition?
The good medical reason for giving doses of painkillers is easily detected from an analysis of the word "painkiller" if you think about it. Or perhaps you have first hand evidence that none of the decedents was suffering pain?
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
The point of the law is to disallow opt out. No one gets to opt out of receiving the tax.
But as I understand it it is not a tax on links, but would be a tax on links plus summary/extract.
Fucking stupid idea either way.
Extracts get posted here with a link all the freaking time. Same everywhere else.
BINO isn't available precisely because we will be rule takers. The EU will set the rules not particularly to our advantage. But we need to sign up to the rules if we are going to carry on roughly as at present. No deal is the absence of an arrangement and is therefore unsustainable. Actually a deal is entirely reachable but we need to understand that it is relative to nothing, not relative to the status quo. The negotiating space between better than nothing and as good as what we had is a big one. I am pretty sure we will end up in the middle: much better than nothing but much worse than what we had. That isn't BINO however.
The first rule of Tory Brexit policy is that the ERG are in the driving seat. The moderates shake their heads, assure everyone that the headbangers will soon be put back in their box and then give way. This is the story of Cameron's leadership, the referendum, May's divisive approach and unachievable red lines, the triggering of article 50 without any preparation, and today once more the Tory moderates have shown themselves to be paper tigers. The ERG knows that the government will never be able to agree an acceptable withdrawal deal, they don't want a deal in any case. All they have to do is ensure that the chaos is prolonged until the date of withdrawal and they will get their wish. The country will go over the cliff. This must now be a very strong possibility.
RCS wrote Anazina is right about one thing: London is significantly smaller than people think, and walking around the central bits is almost always the quickest way to get around. I used to work on St James's Street in the West End, and for anything nearer than St Paul's in the City, I would walk. It would take me 30 minutes, and I'd know my arrival time to the minute, rather than taking a lottery with the tube or a taxi.
—-
London is a big city but the truth is that humans can cover ground quickly. As you say, if the journey is under two and a half miles, walk it. You see more, get there reliably on time, keep fit, and can make private calls while walking. Why people use the tube for short trips is beyond me.
"can make private calls while walking"
Not these days. The moped gangs will have your phone.
RCS wrote Anazina is right about one thing: London is significantly smaller than people think, and walking around the central bits is almost always the quickest way to get around. I used to work on St James's Street in the West End, and for anything nearer than St Paul's in the City, I would walk. It would take me 30 minutes, and I'd know my arrival time to the minute, rather than taking a lottery with the tube or a taxi.
—-
London is a big city but the truth is that humans can cover ground quickly. As you say, if the journey is under two and a half miles, walk it. You see more, get there reliably on time, keep fit, and can make private calls while walking. Why people use the tube for short trips is beyond me.
"can make private calls while walking"
Not these days. The moped gangs will have your phone.
On the subject of gaming, has anyone played Frostpunk yet? It looks great, but I'm rather busy at the moment...
It does look interesting and I've got three months in which to not do very much coming up!
Have you played Subnautica and Detroit becomes human?
Didn't fancy Subnautica, played Detroit - meh. God of War was good. Still hoping for a huge expansion to Monster Hunter World before the end of the year is out. Another 15 monsters and a couple of new locations would be great.
RCS wrote Anazina is right about one thing: London is significantly smaller than people think, and walking around the central bits is almost always the quickest way to get around. I used to work on St James's Street in the West End, and for anything nearer than St Paul's in the City, I would walk. It would take me 30 minutes, and I'd know my arrival time to the minute, rather than taking a lottery with the tube or a taxi.
—-
London is a big city but the truth is that humans can cover ground quickly. As you say, if the journey is under two and a half miles, walk it. You see more, get there reliably on time, keep fit, and can make private calls while walking. Why people use the tube for short trips is beyond me.
"can make private calls while walking"
Not these days. The moped gangs will have your phone.
RCS wrote Anazina is right about one thing: London is significantly smaller than people think, and walking around the central bits is almost always the quickest way to get around. I used to work on St James's Street in the West End, and for anything nearer than St Paul's in the City, I would walk. It would take me 30 minutes, and I'd know my arrival time to the minute, rather than taking a lottery with the tube or a taxi.
—-
London is a big city but the truth is that humans can cover ground quickly. As you say, if the journey is under two and a half miles, walk it. You see more, get there reliably on time, keep fit, and can make private calls while walking. Why people use the tube for short trips is beyond me.
"can make private calls while walking"
Not these days. The moped gangs will have your phone.
Bluetooth. It also avoids your arm getting sore.
Also, as a rule in Central London you'll be travelling faster on foot than the guy on the moped, which reduces your risk somewhat.
Anyone picked up Pillars of Eternity 2? The first was a game I remember enjoying quite a bit - the Baldur's Gate style of game is one I like, for all I never played BG back in the day - but I've not since had the interest to replay it. Conversely I just replayed Fallout 3 and all expansions, and am working through New Vegas again. They hold up pretty well.
And replaying Darkest Dungeon - the game with the world's greatest narrator ever. Being trapped in a grim, never ending struggle with twisted monstrosities and being driven mad for some reason reminds me of PB
Anyone picked up Pillars of Eternity 2? The first was a game I remember enjoying quite a bit - the Baldur's Gate style of game is one I like, for all I never played BG back in the day - but I've not since had the interest to replay it. Conversely I just replayed Fallout 3 and all expansions, and am working through New Vegas again. They hold up pretty well.
Re the link tax, my guess is that the majority of publications will say "It's OK to post links to our content, whoever you are, and there's nothing to pay". And a few organisations, who think they're special, will attempt to charge. And will therefore not get listed in search results, and will eventually realise they were idiots.
The point of the law is to disallow opt out. No one gets to opt out of receiving the tax.
But as I understand it it is not a tax on links, but would be a tax on links plus summary/extract.
Comments
Whether it would be able to I don't know. Possibly not in Europe.
It is ironic to reflect that if this goes ahead Brexit might just be the salvation of our university system. Any university that can't use internet search engines is going to be at a huge disadvantage. It will wreck the French system for a start.
The farce in Caernarfon on 14 June had John Mann, Isabel Oakeshott, Dominic Grieve and Matthew Wright on Question Time.
Oh, and they added Leanne Wood as the final panelist as the token Welsh representative.
For normal men, it may be impossible.
For those of us with eight foot horns on our organ, it's just a matter of touching it at the right moment...
Edit - I was going to make a pun on pipes and three fiddlers, but that would be smutty.
Basically,a number of members the Houses of Lords and the Commons must be coke-heads,not forgetting the old whisky soaks,and these addicts are the same people who deny patients ,including children ,appropriate prescribed cannabis medication by their stupid laws.
and they are poisoning the eels.
Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2018/06/20/much-cocaine-eels-rivers-totally-wired-7647282/?ito=cbshare
When I play wrong notes I sometimes get egged by superannuated choirmembers and that's as close as I get.
Clarke is just sticking to his guns. He's strayed into territory where if he looked around he'd find himself on the wrong side of his own fence. He'll work that out eventually.
It's a really crap piece of legislation, drafted by people with minimal contact with the real world who don't ever seem to have been in business. It makes our economy less competitive, it increases bureaucracy and it increases the cost of services for us all for no obvious benefit. Really, really stupid. But it does not prevent marketing for or against the EU.
Why anyone watches it is beyond me.
its programme not program.
"Given that the only men presenters of the programme since it was first broadcast have been man then that is, surely, a strong case for a woman to take this on".
We just had a friend nip around for a cup of tea, and a few minutes after she had left she was back with a flat tyre.
A couple of things that interested me:
*) I haven't had to change a tyre for twenty years, and neither Mrs J or our guest had ever changed one. In that time I've probably done 200,000+ miles Are flat tyres a lot less common than they were (perhaps due to improved tyre belts)?
*) Space saver tyres are weird and unholy (pun intended).
Mediocrity rules. Theresa May should be well placed.
I think I've changed one tyre in the last ten years. I've also had a slow puncture that I got the tyre place to deal with (in fact I've got another one now I need to get sorted).
I think they are less common. Maybe smoother road surfaces and fewer glass bottles have an effect as well?
My car has managed about 40,000 miles with almost nothing done to it. My bike, on the other hand, in the 1,500 miles or so I've done on it in the year and a bit since I bought it has had three punctures and needed a new chain, new brake blocks and a new cassette. It needs a service about every 500 miles. It's as expensive as buying petrol for a car.
I suspect that you could have a situation like US-Canada, where for a Canadian to work in the US, they need to find an employer who's willing to go on-line, register as an employer who hires Canadians, fill out an on-line form, and the Canadian needs to be criminal record free. It's essentially FoM, except that for low skilled/wage jobs, especially ones that pay by the hour and where the employee might not be around for long, most businesses can't be bothered. But, if you're hiring a software developer and paying $100k, it's hoop that people will jump through.
That would probably satisfy a substantial minority, and if it didn't restrict immigration enough, you could limit it to certain sectors, or have minimum salary or qualifications requirements.
Most annoying thing about all this was I told the hire company they were useless and they told me it is their deliberate policy not to put the key thingy in the car, and that I had signed a bit of paper acknowledging there wasn't one. My mind is still boggling about this, but because I had a plane to catch I never found out why.
Message from the Commons
That they agree to certain amendments made by the Lords in lieu of amendments made by the Lords to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill to which they disagreed.
They agree to the amendment made by the Lords to their amendment made in lieu of an amendment made by the Lords to which they disagreed.
And they agree to the amendments made by the Lords to their amendments made in lieu of the amendment made by the Lords to which they disagreed with amendments to which they desire the agreement of your Lordships.
https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/9942fed9-ad28-4b55-8811-5e61b053436a
19:30:36
At a forum I posted in and was a moderator of the admin added the domain name of these sites to the site's swear word filter list. If anyone attempted to link to that news site then the domain name would be asterisked out.
Lessons to be learned, but much may have been superseded by current practice.
It's a sh*tty thing to do.
An institutionalised practice of killing, in other words.
Shocking. Really shocking.
Mark Easton is giving the NHS both barrels on its culture of placing its reputation above the interests of its patients and not taking whistleblowers seriously:
“A long-standing and dangerous weakness”.
The problem is that if trade relations with Canada deteriorate further, it’s going to be pretty tempting for the Trump administration to start auditing Canadian TN holders to see if they really are doing the job they were hired for.
The fact that it has taken so long to uncover this and that there has been no effective action taken against those responsible would tend to suggest not. And if so can we really say that lessons have been learnt?
But as I understand it it is not a tax on links, but would be a tax on links plus summary/extract.
Fucking stupid idea either way.
Do you have some other definition?
—-
London is a big city but the truth is that humans can cover ground quickly. As you say, if the journey is under two and a half miles, walk it. You see more, get there reliably on time, keep fit, and can make private calls while walking. Why people use the tube for short trips is beyond me.
So TM survives and takes on the EU
She just keeps rolling along
Not these days. The moped gangs will have your phone.
Also, as a rule in Central London you'll be travelling faster on foot than the guy on the moped, which reduces your risk somewhat.
And replaying Darkest Dungeon - the game with the world's greatest narrator ever. Being trapped in a grim, never ending struggle with twisted monstrosities and being driven mad for some reason reminds me of PB