Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.
The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
The CAA requirements for a commercial drone operation are not dissimilar to those for manned aircraft operations, include ground school and a flying test for pilots and production of operating procedures by the company.
What’s going on at Gatwick appears to be the quite deliberate misuse of the sort of drones used commercially, some organised group must be behind it and it’s surprising we haven’t heard from them yet. Many other groups are going to see what’s going on and see the amount of disruption that can be caused by only a few people.
Yep I am aware of the requirements having done the school. I use a drone for photographing archaeological sites as part of my consultancy work.
That’s interesting. I might PM you in the new year if that’s okay, I’ve done some drone flying in other countries and was looking at getting a U.K. CAA approval.
What’s almost certain from today’s story is that life will become harder for hobbyist and commercial drone pilots, while having no impact at all on the idiots who want to fly them near airports.
I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
She is called Jade. There really isn't any ambiguity.
Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?
Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
G , a blind man could see he was saying that, fact is he was right and should have been shouting it out.
LIKE!!!!!
No, not like. Clearly he himself believes it would be wrong to say it or he would admit it, or say he didn't say it but that it was true.
If a party would hit the roof in outrage if their opponents did it no matter how true, then it is not genuinely defendable in my view. Yes that means Tories will make a bigger deal than if one of them did it, but if the alleged perpetrator won't defend using the phrase and instead claims they didn't do it, I see no reason to defend it either.
And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
We may end up with every single person unhappy with the final result at this rate.
Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.
I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.
Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.
Interesting background – I can see that that might be true. Also, Geordie Grieg (the new editor) is a world away from the odious Paul Dacre's politics. Greig is a sort of europhile, metropolitan liberal Tory. It's a completely different newspaper these days.
Yes, but the Mail's readers, by and large, are not. Which made it seems like an interesting pivot.
As a business decision, it makes sense now. Keeping advertisers on board is much more important for the long term health of the Mail's brand.
Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?
Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
Did you forget you aren't allowed to assume gender?
I am 75 and not au fait with these ideas
G , there is some right old rubbish spoken nowadays, oh for the days when men were men and women were women and there were no other stupid made up silly options.
Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.
The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
We may end up with every single person unhappy with the final result at this rate.
I am OK with that, it makes Rejoin far more likely if the Brexit outcome is forced on a public that has changed its mind.
Brexiteers who want it to stick should support a #peoplesvote.
A seriously good end-of-term piece by Kellner. Good to see somebody is working this week.
Moreover, most Labour leave voters who take sides back a people’s vote, by 56-44%. Again, the evidence suggests little downside to Labour backing a people’s vote. Indeed, among Labour supporters generally, such a vote is massively popular, with 77% in favour and just 23% against. A further challenge for Jeremy Corbyn is to persuade voters that he could get a better Brexit deal if he were prime minister. This claim is rejected by 68%-11% of voters generally, by 47%-30% of Labour voters, and – perhaps most ominously – by 52-23% of Labour leave voters.
Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?
Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
Did you forget you aren't allowed to assume gender?
I am 75 and not au fait with these ideas
G , there is some right old rubbish spoken nowadays, oh for the days when men were men and women were women and there were no other stupid made up silly options.
Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?
I think her gags were lame but PMQs is full of lame jokes and posturing from both government and opposition, it's the nature of the spectacle. Corbyn clearly thinks the alleged words would be worse than her lame jokes since he's not defending on the basis they would be true anyway and he didn't say it, he's just making clear he did not.
He would never let a Tory get away with saying it. Which is the only reason whether he said it matters.
He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.
Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.
If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
The word of Brexit was revealed to Theresa May and to Theresa May alone. And she has a direct line to the views of the vast mority of the "British People'!
She just isn't interested in what anyone else, who hasn't had the benefit of that revelation, hs to say.
And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
We may end up with every single person unhappy with the final result at this rate.
That is kind of what I always assumed, just not so many so unhappy.
But actually half or more will be ecstatic at this rate as we remain.
Seems like a majority of people think he did say stupid woman but that it’s not actually sexist.
I think I would agree with that. The woman part of stupid woman is simply for lack of a different term. I could just as easily see May calling Corbyn a stupid man, but stupid person doesn’t really sound natural, I think most people would use woman/man in this context. He clearly shouldn’t have said it but I don’t see this story lasting much longer, it was just a nice distraction from Brexit.
My view. It's rude, but not sexist. It's amazing how controlled we expect politicians to be, when a muttered expression like that hits the news. Although presumably it was audible to the target person.
And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
We may end up with every single person unhappy with the final result at this rate.
I am OK with that, it makes Rejoin far more likely if the Brexit outcome is forced on a public that has changed its mind.
Brexiteers who want it to stick should support a #peoplesvote.
I do support the People's Vote. It was close but decisive.
Off work and on shopping detail - I think I'd rather be at work in all honesty. Went through Westfield at Stratford - didn't seem that busy to me and I do think for all the last minute push at the weekend it's going to be a disastrous season for much of High Street retail.
Corbyn clearly said what many people think he said. Does it matter? Not really except to re-enforce a view he's not fit to be Prime Minister and I suppose ultimately one of the two things holding the Conservatives together is terror of a Corbyn Government (the other is I think the Conservatives quite like being in Government, it's their role while Opposition doesn't suit them anywhere near as well).
Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.
I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.
Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.
Interesting background – I can see that that might be true. Also, Geordie Grieg (the new editor) is a world away from the odious Paul Dacre's politics. Greig is a sort of europhile, metropolitan liberal Tory. It's a completely different newspaper these days.
Yes, but the Mail's readers, by and large, are not. Which made it seems like an interesting pivot.
As a business decision, it makes sense now. Keeping advertisers on board is much more important for the long term health of the Mail's brand.
No-one is going to feel sorry for the readers who spend all day upticking angry comments underneath their website articles, for sure.
He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.
Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.
If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
The word of Brexit was revealed to Theresa May and to Theresa May alone. And she has a direct line to the views of the vast mority of the "British People'!
She just isn't interested in what anyone else, who hasn't had the benefit of that revelation, hs to say.
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
Yes, the personal is often underestimated as a driver of big political decisions. If Corbyn hates May's guts, if he really cannot stand the woman, it must make it that little bit less likely that he does anything, anything at all, to make her life easier, regardless of other considerations.
The most extreme example of this, of being driven exclusively by petty likes and dislikes, is of course the current US president. He would start World War III if he knew it would irritate Barack Obama.
I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
Southend Airport is a very pleasant place, for an airport. Considerably, by a considerable stretch, better than Stansted.
Don't let them in on the secret.
Bad Guy Stansted airport Calls itself "London" Stansted Is actually nearly in Norfolk
Its not that bad - 50 minutes from Liverpool Street (which is faster than the tube to Heathrow) - what makes it "interesting" is its an (almost) exclusively short haul airport - so quite a different passenger mix from Heathrow or Gatwick. And LOTS more carry on.....
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
It may or may not be "business friendly" - some bits of business like it (because they are terrified of No Deal) and other parts of business are less enthusiastic. Don't assume the CBI is either a) united or b) speaks for all business.
To be picky, it won't be a legal treaty unless we approve it. If the Commons fails to back her next month, she could go down in history as another Conservative PM wrecked on the rocks of Europe.
If I was anywhere near Gatwick, I’d stay indoors and switch off anything electronic. If the military are getting their toys out there could well be some unintended disruption.
EMP should fix the drones. Might be some collateral damage though.
Ivan Lewis had already been suspended from the party following allegations of sexual harassment!
Yes, it's a bit of a coincidence that these Labour MPs only discover that their consciences don't allow them to stay in the party only when they're about to be found guilty of misbehaviour (Woodcock, Lewis), or are about to be deselected (Field).
I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
She is called Jade. There really isn't any ambiguity.
It's also a way for cisgendered people to show solidarity and to make transgendered people's need to state their pronouns be unexceptional.
He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.
Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.
If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
The word of Brexit was revealed to Theresa May and to Theresa May alone. And she has a direct line to the views of the vast mority of the "British People'!
She just isn't interested in what anyone else, who hasn't had the benefit of that revelation, hs to say.
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
Sorry, Mr G; as you know I have a high opinion of you, so, in the words of Oliver Cromwell, I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.
He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.
Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.
If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
She is called Jade. There really isn't any ambiguity.
It's also a way for cisgendered people to show solidarity and to make transgendered people's need to state their pronouns be unexceptional.
A teeny bit woke, perhaps, but unless you're an alt-reich snowflake looking for something to be triggered by, completely harmless.
I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
She is called Jade. There really isn't any ambiguity.
It's also a way for cisgendered people to show solidarity and to make transgendered people's need to state their pronouns be unexceptional.
In written communication there's only any need if the name is ambiguous (Chris is an example that springs to mind) or if the name is used by the less common gender (I was at school with a Georgina who was always George). None of this requires transgenderism to be relevant.
It might be intended to "show solidarity" - it just looks stupid.
I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
She is called Jade. There really isn't any ambiguity.
It's also a way for cisgendered people to show solidarity and to make transgendered people's need to state their pronouns be unexceptional.
A teeny bit woke, perhaps, but unless you're an alt-reich snowflake looking for something to be triggered by, completely harmless.
I wasn't triggered - I laughed heartily. It was amusing not offensive.
Off work and on shopping detail - I think I'd rather be at work in all honesty. Went through Westfield at Stratford - didn't seem that busy to me and I do think for all the last minute push at the weekend it's going to be a disastrous season for much of High Street retail.
Corbyn clearly said what many people think he said. Does it matter? Not really except to re-enforce a view he's not fit to be Prime Minister and I suppose ultimately one of the two things holding the Conservatives together is terror of a Corbyn Government (the other is I think the Conservatives quite like being in Government, it's their role while Opposition doesn't suit them anywhere near as well).
Highcross in Leicester was busy, but not bursting last night. Neither John Lewis nor Jessops still had stock of what I wanted, so have either had a great Christmas and sold out, or cocked up stock levels and sent another willing customer to t'internet.
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have ubeen better from TM, but she is too partisan.
Yes, the personal is often underestimated as a driver of big political decisions.
Indeed it is. Personal relationships are very important. If May had spent more time cultivating backbench MPs of all parties she might well be close to getting her deal through. But her high handed remoteness and personal diffidence antagonises people and makes them less likely to be supportive. Her attempts to get Labour MPs on board consisted solely of briefing the media about how at least 30 Labour MPs favoured a deal. If she had actually spoken privately to any MPs she would have realised that this was wishful thinking.
I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
Southend Airport is a very pleasant place, for an airport. Considerably, by a considerable stretch, better than Stansted.
Don't let them in on the secret.
Bad Guy Stansted airport Calls itself "London" Stansted Is actually nearly in Norfolk
"Nearly in Norfolk ...?'
LOL. Your knowledge of geography is as poor as your knowledge of the EU !
I was exaggerating for comic effect. I grew up in Essex.
Ah, that explains a lot.
You've done well to learn to type. Have you progressed past the randomly-bashing-at-the-keys stage
It's attitudes like that that encourage Brexit. Even as if, as I assume intended, 'humorous'!
My eldest granddaughter, when at Uni in the N of England, always described herself as a 'girl from Essex', NOT as Essex Girl. Incidentally, she now works in Yorkshire.
I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
She is called Jade. There really isn't any ambiguity.
It's also a way for cisgendered people to show solidarity and to make transgendered people's need to state their pronouns be unexceptional.
A teeny bit woke, perhaps, but unless you're an alt-reich snowflake looking for something to be triggered by, completely harmless.
I wasn't triggered - I laughed heartily. It was amusing not offensive.
Oh I see, I apologise then. Far too often you see obnoxious alt-reich USians on Twitter who have decided that queers are too hard a target now, and have decided to shift their abuse and victimisation onto trans- people as the next phase of the insufferable culture war.
Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.
The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
The CAA requirements for a commercial drone operation are not dissimilar to those for manned aircraft operations, include ground school and a flying test for pilots and production of operating procedures by the company.
What’s going on at Gatwick appears to be the quite deliberate misuse of the sort of drones used commercially, some organised group must be behind it and it’s surprising we haven’t heard from them yet. Many other groups are going to see what’s going on and see the amount of disruption that can be caused by only a few people.
Yep I am aware of the requirements having done the school. I use a drone for photographing archaeological sites as part of my consultancy work.
That’s interesting. I might PM you in the new year if that’s okay, I’ve done some drone flying in other countries and was looking at getting a U.K. CAA approval.
What’s almost certain from today’s story is that life will become harder for hobbyist and commercial drone pilots, while having no impact at all on the idiots who want to fly them near airports.
Unfortunately so. That said the Government measures to date have been balanced and I can't really complain. I know there have been masses of incidents of people using drones for peeping tom activities and also flying them in built up areas where if they fall they could do some serious harm to people. The CAA stuff is a bit costly (about £1000 when I did it though it has come down somewhat now) but actually very useful over and above just getting apiece of paper. Also the requirements as published for hobbyists do not seem to onerous to be honest. Basically obey the law and register your drone.
I only use a small drone (less than 2Kg) but it has the various limiters in it (not flying above 400ft and it will not work if it is inside an airfield red zone.) It gives me peace of mind that I don't inadvertently do something wrong. My view is that to actually fly over an airport/approach lane by accident is bloody difficult which why I think this is intentional.
Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.
I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.
Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.
Interesting background – I can see that that might be true. Also, Geordie Grieg (the new editor) is a world away from the odious Paul Dacre's politics. Greig is a sort of europhile, metropolitan liberal Tory. It's a completely different newspaper these days.
Yes, but the Mail's readers, by and large, are not. Which made it seems like an interesting pivot.
As a business decision, it makes sense now. Keeping advertisers on board is much more important for the long term health of the Mail's brand.
No-one is going to feel sorry for the readers who spend all day upticking angry comments underneath their website articles, for sure.
I think you need to check out the two options 1) mail on line (quite UKIP) 2) daily mail as the newspaper and downloaded as mail plus
They are very different - I never read mail on line
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
It may or may not be "business friendly" - some bits of business like it (because they are terrified of No Deal) and other parts of business are less enthusiastic. Don't assume the CBI is either a) united or b) speaks for all business.
To be picky, it won't be a legal treaty unless we approve it. If the Commons fails to back her next month, she could go down in history as another Conservative PM wrecked on the rocks of Europe.
Maybe but she has an EU approved treaty and is likely to be unique in history if we fail to leave
And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
We may end up with every single person unhappy with the final result at this rate.
I am OK with that, it makes Rejoin far more likely if the Brexit outcome is forced on a public that has changed its mind.
Brexiteers who want it to stick should support a #peoplesvote.
I do support the People's Vote. It was close but decisive.
Your close but decisive support for the people's vote is welcome! When the vote comes let's hope it is decisive and not close.
Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.
The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
Ivan Lewis had already been suspended from the party following allegations of sexual harassment!
Yes, it's a bit of a coincidence that these Labour MPs only discover that their consciences don't allow them to stay in the party only when they're about to be found guilty of misbehaviour (Woodcock, Lewis), or are about to be deselected (Field).
It's attitudes like that that encourage Brexit. Even as if, as I assume intended, 'humorous'!
My eldest granddaughter, when at Uni in the N of England, always described herself as a 'girl from Essex', NOT as Essex Girl. Incidentally, she now works in Yorkshire.
T'was indeed meant to be a joke. Although it's interesting to see that Brexiteers are so utterly lacking in humour that such a comment could be seen as 'encouraging' Brexit!
I mean, FFS!
I'm from Derbyshire, and as I often say: "Deryshire born, Derbyshire bred. Strong in t'arm, think in t'head."
I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
Southend Airport is a very pleasant place, for an airport. Considerably, by a considerable stretch, better than Stansted.
Don't let them in on the secret.
Bad Guy Stansted airport Calls itself "London" Stansted Is actually nearly in Norfolk
"Nearly in Norfolk ...?'
LOL. Your knowledge of geography is as poor as your knowledge of the EU !
I was exaggerating for comic effect. I grew up in Essex.
Ah, that explains a lot.
You've done well to learn to type. Have you progressed past the randomly-bashing-at-the-keys stage
It's attitudes like that that encourage Brexit. Even as if, as I assume intended, 'humorous'!
My eldest granddaughter, when at Uni in the N of England, always described herself as a 'girl from Essex', NOT as Essex Girl. Incidentally, she now works in Yorkshire.
Nowt wrong with Essex. It's a beautiful county, in parts. Dedham Vale is stunning, Epping Forest 12 miles of blissful solitude on the edge of London, and has the longest coastline of any county in England (and the most islands).
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
It may or may not be "business friendly" - some bits of business like it (because they are terrified of No Deal) and other parts of business are less enthusiastic. Don't assume the CBI is either a) united or b) speaks for all business.
To be picky, it won't be a legal treaty unless we approve it. If the Commons fails to back her next month, she could go down in history as another Conservative PM wrecked on the rocks of Europe.
Maybe but she has an EU approved treaty and is likely to be unique in history if we fail to leave
It's not EU approved yet. It's been approved by the EUCO, but it has not yet been approved by the European Parliament, the Parliament of the UK or the Parliaments of the EU27.
Ivan Lewis had already been suspended from the party following allegations of sexual harassment!
Yes, it's a bit of a coincidence that these Labour MPs only discover that their consciences don't allow them to stay in the party only when they're about to be found guilty of misbehaviour (Woodcock, Lewis), or are about to be deselected (Field).
"about to be found guilty"
Might help if they talked to him about the charges first no?
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
It may or may not be "business friendly" - some bits of business like it (because they are terrified of No Deal) and other parts of business are less enthusiastic. Don't assume the CBI is either a) united or b) speaks for all business.
To be picky, it won't be a legal treaty unless we approve it. If the Commons fails to back her next month, she could go down in history as another Conservative PM wrecked on the rocks of Europe.
Maybe but she has an EU approved treaty and is likely to be unique in history if we fail to leave
It's not EU approved yet. It's been approved by the EUCO, but it has not yet been approved by the European Parliament, the Parliament of the UK or the Parliaments of the EU27.
It doesn't have to be approved by the parliaments of the EU27. At least not all of them.
Ivan Lewis had already been suspended from the party following allegations of sexual harassment!
Yes, it's a bit of a coincidence that these Labour MPs only discover that their consciences don't allow them to stay in the party only when they're about to be found guilty of misbehaviour (Woodcock, Lewis), or are about to be deselected (Field).
Not sure you've got cause and effect the right way round.
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
It may or may not be "business friendly" - some bits of business like it (because they are terrified of No Deal) and other parts of business are less enthusiastic. Don't assume the CBI is either a) united or b) speaks for all business.
To be picky, it won't be a legal treaty unless we approve it. If the Commons fails to back her next month, she could go down in history as another Conservative PM wrecked on the rocks of Europe.
Maybe but she has an EU approved treaty and is likely to be unique in history if we fail to leave
It's not EU approved yet. It's been approved by the EUCO, but it has not yet been approved by the European Parliament, the Parliament of the UK or the Parliaments of the EU27.
It doesn't have to be approved by the parliaments of the EU27. At least not all of them.
He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.
Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.
If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
The word of Brexit was revealed to Theresa May and to Theresa May alone. And she has a direct line to the views of the vast mority of the "British People'!
She just isn't interested in what anyone else, who hasn't had the benefit of that revelation, hs to say.
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
Sorry, Mr G; as you know I have a high opinion of you, so, in the words of Oliver Cromwell, I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.
Not sure what I have expressed wrongly to be honest, especially to involve Oliver Cromwell and the Good Lord
And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
We may end up with every single person unhappy with the final result at this rate.
I am OK with that, it makes Rejoin far more likely if the Brexit outcome is forced on a public that has changed its mind.
Brexiteers who want it to stick should support a #peoplesvote.
I do support the People's Vote. It was close but decisive.
Your close but decisive support for the people's vote is welcome! When the vote comes let's hope it is decisive and not close.
I'll give you a time machine to go back to a point where the People's Vote was still in the future.
16:49: Gatwick closed until at least 9pm 17:00: Gatwick closed until at least 10pm
Just extraordinary,
Dismal on the part of the police and the armed forces.
Then again, why are we surprised? It took several nights of criminal rampage in 2011 before the police realised that perhaps it would be best to try to stop the rioters.
Thanks to New Labour, the leadership of the police is now the same ineffectual caste that infests the civil service. Now that we have Crapita organising recruitment for the armed forces, I’m sure they’ll be next.
So, no-dealers of PB, how sanguine do you feel about the UK's ability to cope with a crash-out Brexit now?
Doubt it can be much worse than periods of the 70's such as the 3 day week or winter of discontent. Of course you have to be of a certain vintage to remember the 70's.
It's attitudes like that that encourage Brexit. Even as if, as I assume intended, 'humorous'!
My eldest granddaughter, when at Uni in the N of England, always described herself as a 'girl from Essex', NOT as Essex Girl. Incidentally, she now works in Yorkshire.
T'was indeed meant to be a joke. Although it's interesting to see that Brexiteers are so utterly lacking in humour that such a comment could be seen as 'encouraging' Brexit!
I mean, FFS!
I'm from Derbyshire, and as I often say: "Deryshire born, Derbyshire bred. Strong in t'arm, think in t'head."
I thought that desciption applied to Yorkshire!
If I can explain my concern, it's that Brexit was voted for by people who were disenchanted by what they saw as the attitudes of a 'metropolitan elite'
And, for the avoidance of doubt I voted FOR British involvement in the EU as I did in 1975. And this time, as again I did in '75 I'll do my best to encourage my neighbours to do the same thing. I didn't do enough, I fear and regret, in 2016.
Edited for date. I'm sure we'll have sorted this within 100 years!
Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.
The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
Yep I am aware of the requirements having done the school. I use a drone for photographing archaeological sites as part of my consultancy work.
That’s interesting. I might PM you in the new year if that’s okay, I’ve done some drone flying in other countries and was looking at getting a U.K. CAA approval.
What’s almost certain from today’s story is that life will become harder for hobbyist and commercial drone pilots, while having no impact at all on the idiots who want to fly them near airports.
Unfortunately so. That said the Government measures to date have been balanced and I can't really complain. I know there have been masses of incidents of people using drones for peeping tom activities and also flying them in built up areas where if they fall they could do some serious harm to people. The CAA stuff is a bit costly (about £1000 when I did it though it has come down somewhat now) but actually very useful over and above just getting apiece of paper. Also the requirements as published for hobbyists do not seem to onerous to be honest. Basically obey the law and register your drone.
I only use a small drone (less than 2Kg) but it has the various limiters in it (not flying above 400ft and it will not work if it is inside an airfield red zone.) It gives me peace of mind that I don't inadvertently do something wrong. My view is that to actually fly over an airport/approach lane by accident is bloody difficult which why I think this is intentional.
Very useful, thanks. I did a lot of the ground school stuff a decade ago as part of my private pilot’s licence, and most of it is just common sense and knowing the law.
As you say, most of the mid-range drones have a geofencing database built in, so you can’t fly in controlled airspace.
The Gatwick incident is almost certainly intentional, I’m sure we’ll find out soon enough which group is behind it. There’s a bloody big piece of restricted airspace around LGW, no chance it’s an accident that someone’s flying there. I’m guessing from the response that we are dealing with something big enough to seriously damage a plane, rather than a toy drone - probably one or more of the six-rotor drones that can carry a 3kg SLR camera - or 3kg of batteries that give it an hour or more of endurance.
It's attitudes like that that encourage Brexit. Even as if, as I assume intended, 'humorous'!
My eldest granddaughter, when at Uni in the N of England, always described herself as a 'girl from Essex', NOT as Essex Girl. Incidentally, she now works in Yorkshire.
T'was indeed meant to be a joke. Although it's interesting to see that Brexiteers are so utterly lacking in humour that such a comment could be seen as 'encouraging' Brexit!
A lot of people nowadays have had a sense of humour bypass. Or at least effect to have had one when it suits their purpose.
Anti-social media is absolutely saturated with professional offence takers expressing outrage, faux or genuine, about everyone and against everything.
He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.
Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.
If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.
Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
The word of Brexit was revealed to Theresa May and to Theresa May alone. And she has a direct line to the views of the vast mority of the "British People'!
She just isn't interested in what anyone else, who hasn't had the benefit of that revelation, hs to say.
I believe TM knew the two extremes of no deal and no brexit were not possible so she set herself on a course that delivers a business friendly brexit which is leaving but also is not remain
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
Sorry, Mr G; as you know I have a high opinion of you, so, in the words of Oliver Cromwell, I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.
Not sure what I have expressed wrongly to be honest, especially to involve Oliver Cromwell and the Good Lord
The post to which I replied. That Mrs May knows what she is doing, and it is her 'best'!
Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.
The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
Comments
Calls itself "London" Stansted
Is actually nearly in Norfolk
What’s almost certain from today’s story is that life will become harder for hobbyist and commercial drone pilots, while having no impact at all on the idiots who want to fly them near airports.
If a party would hit the roof in outrage if their opponents did it no matter how true, then it is not genuinely defendable in my view. Yes that means Tories will make a bigger deal than if one of them did it, but if the alleged perpetrator won't defend using the phrase and instead claims they didn't do it, I see no reason to defend it either.
As a business decision, it makes sense now. Keeping advertisers on board is much more important for the long term health of the Mail's brand.
Brexiteers who want it to stick should support a #peoplesvote.
He would never let a Tory get away with saying it. Which is the only reason whether he said it matters.
She just isn't interested in what anyone else, who hasn't had the benefit of that revelation, hs to say.
But actually half or more will be ecstatic at this rate as we remain.
Off work and on shopping detail - I think I'd rather be at work in all honesty. Went through Westfield at Stratford - didn't seem that busy to me and I do think for all the last minute push at the weekend it's going to be a disastrous season for much of High Street retail.
Corbyn clearly said what many people think he said. Does it matter? Not really except to re-enforce a view he's not fit to be Prime Minister and I suppose ultimately one of the two things holding the Conservatives together is terror of a Corbyn Government (the other is I think the Conservatives quite like being in Government, it's their role while Opposition doesn't suit them anywhere near as well).
https://twitter.com/esa/status/1075723754251137024
It is a brave course and she may not succeed but she will always go down as the British PM who obtained a legal brexit treaty with the EU
The most extreme example of this, of being driven exclusively by petty likes and dislikes, is of course the current US president. He would start World War III if he knew it would irritate Barack Obama.
To be picky, it won't be a legal treaty unless we approve it. If the Commons fails to back her next month, she could go down in history as another Conservative PM wrecked on the rocks of Europe.
Might be some collateral damage though.
LOL. Your knowledge of geography is as poor as your knowledge of the EU !
You've done well to learn to type. Have you progressed past the randomly-bashing-at-the-keys stage
It might be intended to "show solidarity" - it just looks stupid.
17:00: Gatwick closed until at least 10pm
Just extraordinary,
My eldest granddaughter, when at Uni in the N of England, always described herself as a 'girl from Essex', NOT as Essex Girl.
Incidentally, she now works in Yorkshire.
I only use a small drone (less than 2Kg) but it has the various limiters in it (not flying above 400ft and it will not work if it is inside an airfield red zone.) It gives me peace of mind that I don't inadvertently do something wrong. My view is that to actually fly over an airport/approach lane by accident is bloody difficult which why I think this is intentional.
Read his letter.
They are very different - I never read mail on line
In other news
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6515365/Only-lip-reader-Jeremy-Corbyns-stupid-people-claim-dropped-CPS.html
Probably up for a knighthood ;-)
Of course, I always like to point out that the single most successful online news source in the world, Buzzfeed, has no banner ads and never has.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKNN49idCUo
I mean, FFS!
I'm from Derbyshire, and as I often say: "Deryshire born, Derbyshire bred. Strong in t'arm, think in t'head."
Might help if they talked to him about the charges first no?
So much for presumed innocent.
https://twitter.com/AliBunkallSKY/status/1075784076479643651
Does anyone know what the parameters are?
Then again, why are we surprised? It took several nights of criminal rampage in 2011 before the police realised that perhaps it would be best to try to stop the rioters.
Thanks to New Labour, the leadership of the police is now the same ineffectual caste that infests the civil service. Now that we have Crapita organising recruitment for the armed forces, I’m sure they’ll be next.
I presumes its that they'll start executing every civilian in Crawley until somebody owns up.
If I can explain my concern, it's that Brexit was voted for by people who were disenchanted by what they saw as the attitudes of a 'metropolitan elite'
And, for the avoidance of doubt I voted FOR British involvement in the EU as I did in 1975. And this time, as again I did in '75 I'll do my best to encourage my neighbours to do the same thing. I didn't do enough, I fear and regret, in 2016.
Edited for date. I'm sure we'll have sorted this within 100 years!
Surely only those on the white working class estates are likely to be involved. Leave out the nicer areas of Crawley.. some it is very leafy.
As you say, most of the mid-range drones have a geofencing database built in, so you can’t fly in controlled airspace.
The Gatwick incident is almost certainly intentional, I’m sure we’ll find out soon enough which group is behind it. There’s a bloody big piece of restricted airspace around LGW, no chance it’s an accident that someone’s flying there. I’m guessing from the response that we are dealing with something big enough to seriously damage a plane, rather than a toy drone - probably one or more of the six-rotor drones that can carry a 3kg SLR camera - or 3kg of batteries that give it an hour or more of endurance.
Anti-social media is absolutely saturated with professional offence takers expressing outrage, faux or genuine, about everyone and against everything.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/12/16767000/police-netherlands-eagles-rogue-drones