@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
Indeed. Currently offshore wind is expensive but well understood and at least mostly functional.
Offshore wind is not expensive. It is now around £40 mW/h. What it is is unreliable. That is why you pay a vast premium for nuclear - £92.50 for Hinkley. Why tidal is such a threat to nuclear is that a series of tidal lagoons around the coast provide that reliabily, that baseload. Want to know how much tidal power will be producing on 30 July 2120? Check a tide chart. Want to know how much wind will be producing 30th June 2020? Have a guess....
Certainty plus reliability. Tidal is a no-brainer.
I thought the reason we pay £92.50 for Hinkley is Osborne screwed up by signing that contract. I'm a big fan of his generally but that was one of his greatest mistakes.
The issue is that win is £40 mW/h and that price is going down. That's become the baseline to compare new projects to now unfortunately - I suspect had Cardiff been ready at the same time as Hinkley it would have been signed up to then but now people are expecting cheaper.
And I imagine there's an element in BEIS of not wanting to admit Hinkley is a mistake. The same reason as to why no matter how much HS2 gets more expensive it is always (only just) worth doing anyway.
The final decision to go ahead with Hinkley C was taken by Theresa May.
The final decision not to support Swansea Bay was taken by Theresa May.
Goege Osborne was (and remains) a firm believer in the merits of Swansea Bay and other tidal lagoons.
Yet another strike against the worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
Indeed. Currently offshore wind is expensive but well understood and at least mostly functional.
Offshore wind is not expensive. It is now around £40 mW/h. What it is is unreliable. That is why you pay a vast premium for nuclear - £92.50 for Hinkley. Why tidal is such a threat to nuclear is that a series of tidal lagoons around the coast provide that reliabily, that baseload. Want to know how much tidal power will be producing on 30 July 2120? Check a tide chart. Want to know how much wind will be producing 30th June 2020? Have a guess....
Certainty plus reliability. Tidal is a no-brainer.
Offshore wind may actually produce electricity at £40 per MW/h (not mW/h I hope) but when you add the cost of having a CCGT station on standby for when the wind doesn't blow it starts to look less cheap...
I agree re: tidal but I can't see a Severn barrage (for example) ever being allowed on environmental grounds. Turbines on the floor of the Pentland Firth, yes, but the technology isn't quite there yet.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
Have you got it on your bedroom wall to give the finger to and laugh at every morning?
It is pretty funny, especially looking back after he gave his 'BLM?! Never heard of it!' interview yesterday...
He simply made it clear that by supporting the anti-racism message of BLM - which is what it's known for tbf - he is not endorsing anything and everything which is said either by or in the name of the movement.
Perfectly reasonable position. Can't see the problem.
The problem is that political messages do not in practice have an independent ethereal existence like Platonic Forms - they rely on their messenger. Starmer - to give him his due here - has the political danger sense to realize that the messengers have already tarnished the message and will only continue to do so in the future, so he spun around 180 degrees and dashed out of that minefield as quickly as he dashed into it. You almost have to admire the shamelessness!
Corbyn, of course, would have charged forwards until he disappeared in a red mist...
Jeremy would have been in Bristol sticking it to Colston. Conviction politician or protest politician - delete to taste.
Starmer quite fancies being PM.
and a plurality of Britons prefer him to Johnson.
The problem for Starmer is the Labour brand. Regardless of the progress he has made on anti-Semitism and celebrating Armed Forces' Day etc, there is a very good chunk of their ex-voters who think that, if Labour is elected, it won't be Starmer's Labour that is running things but the likes of BLM. Once bitten, twice shy.
That will indeed be a key plank of the Tory re-election strategy. Try to convince the more gullible members of the public - a fairly large demographic tbf - that Starmer is merely the reassuring looking frontman behind which there lurks a degenerate marxist cabal pulling his strings. But you are being somewhat optimistic imo in blithely assuming it will work. I doubt it will myself.
It has the singular virtue of being true. The degenerate Marxist cabal didn't just sublimate into the air - it's still right there, like the ingrained stench of tobacco in the house of a lifetime chain-smoker...
For god's sake man get off the internet. They are tracking your every move. Did you notice that Blue Transit Van parked outside your house? IT'S THEM!!
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Scotland shouldn't be compared to England it should be compared to a region of England as that is comparing like-for-like in population areas.
Many regions of England are at or near zero COVID deaths.
Scotland has fewer ethnic minorities as well, and there does appear to be a genetic component
Excuses excuses.
Indeed. Its not like we are short of our quotient of fat smokers and drinkers with high levels of comorbidity.
As ever, the last 3-5 day of all data is subject to reporting issues and will be heavily updated later. Last 5 days fo data included for completeness Mileage may vary. All wrongs reserved. This product may contain nuts. This product may contain nutters. This product may contain trained marxist nutters.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
Indeed. Currently offshore wind is expensive but well understood and at least mostly functional.
Offshore wind is not expensive. It is now around £40 mW/h. What it is is unreliable. That is why you pay a vast premium for nuclear - £92.50 for Hinkley. Why tidal is such a threat to nuclear is that a series of tidal lagoons around the coast provide that reliabily, that baseload. Want to know how much tidal power will be producing on 30 July 2120? Check a tide chart. Want to know how much wind will be producing 30th June 2020? Have a guess....
Certainty plus reliability. Tidal is a no-brainer.
I thought the reason we pay £92.50 for Hinkley is Osborne screwed up by signing that contract. I'm a big fan of his generally but that was one of his greatest mistakes.
The issue is that win is £40 mW/h and that price is going down. That's become the baseline to compare new projects to now unfortunately - I suspect had Cardiff been ready at the same time as Hinkley it would have been signed up to then but now people are expecting cheaper.
And I imagine there's an element in BEIS of not wanting to admit Hinkley is a mistake. The same reason as to why no matter how much HS2 gets more expensive it is always (only just) worth doing anyway.
The final decision to go ahead with Hinkley C was taken by Theresa May.
The final decision not to support Swansea Bay was taken by Theresa May.
Goege Osborne was (and remains) a firm believer in the merits of Swansea Bay and other tidal lagoons.
Yet another strike against the worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
You and @DecrepiterJohnL really are a precious pair when it comes to ignorance of how jaw-droppingly useless some of our nineteenth and twentieth century PMs were.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
You obviously find reading numbers difficult, the Scottish numbers are much much smaller than the English numbers , hence the cartoon, is that simple enough.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
The Four Feathers is very good.
Goodbye Mr Chips from the same year as Gone With The Wind - indeed, Robert Donat beat Clark Gable to the Oscar for Best Actor.
The original Prisoner of Zenda is excellent, worth watching for Douglas Fairbanks Jr's performance alone.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
Apparently the Leicester Lockdown is partly due to the fact the 'sweat shops' there stayed open during the crisis.
Top draw Brexiteer trolling from Andrew Bridgen there. Masterful. Almost Trumpian. He really is coming into his own, the boy.
Yes, the rag trade in Leicester is either very specialist, or stays viable by doing quick fast fashion quicker than the Far East can turnaround, so several places switched to making PPE and kept working. It is an agile trade, but always a lot of sweated labour practices.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
In which case, focus on the Swansea Bay lagoon having a 120 year minimum life. The offshore wind will need to be completely replaced in - at best - 40 years. Given the rigours of the North Sea, quite possibly less (in the US deserts, some have barely lasted 18 years). Again, replacement will be by imports. The sea walls will just need the odd bit of patching up - they could quite possibly last centuries. Then it is down to turbine replacements. La Rance tidal barrage in France has just upgraded its turbines. They should last another sixty years. It produces the cheapest electricity in France. (Which they then export to the UK at top dollar).
Plus the Swansea Lagoon will be a piece of local infrastructure to regenerate the place, used for sport, leisure, the arts. Wind and solar farms get hidden behind high fences and wire; nuclear plants need armed guards. Not exactly local amenities...
Tidal can compete with offshore wind, with now prices at Cardiff sub-£50. Alternativly, you could have a slightly higher price for a 35 year contract for differences - and then 85 years at around £10. Now THAT is a legacy asset.
Oh, and the reason for comparing with nuclear? That is the metric that was used by the UK government. When it sent its report up to Government in 2018, condemning Swansea as "too expensive", one of the numbers was wrong by £30 billion, another by £60 billion - both to the advantage of nuclear, natch. It was a classic example of the Blob at work. BEIS is still wedded to nuclear. The only way it can be remotely competitive is, frankly, if they cheat.
I'm not surprised that sand has an even more corrosive impact on wind turbines than salt water in the air.
Point is, neither are exactly benign conditions for kit to have a long life....
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
In which case, focus on the Swansea Bay lagoon having a 120 year minimum life. The offshore wind will need to be completely replaced in - at best - 40 years. Given the rigours of the North Sea, quite possibly less (in the US deserts, some have barely lasted 18 years). Again, replacement will be by imports. The sea walls will just need the odd bit of patching up - they could quite possibly last centuries. Then it is down to turbine replacements. La Rance tidal barrage in France has just upgraded its turbines. They should last another sixty years. It produces the cheapest electricity in France. (Which they then export to the UK at top dollar).
Plus the Swansea Lagoon will be a piece of local infrastructure to regenerate the place, used for sport, leisure, the arts. Wind and solar farms get hidden behind high fences and wire; nuclear plants need armed guards. Not exactly local amenities...
Tidal can compete with offshore wind, with now prices at Cardiff sub-£50. Alternativly, you could have a slightly higher price for a 35 year contract for differences - and then 85 years at around £10. Now THAT is a legacy asset.
Oh, and the reason for comparing with nuclear? That is the metric that was used by the UK government. When it sent its report up to Government in 2018, condemning Swansea as "too expensive", one of the numbers was wrong by £30 billion, another by £60 billion - both to the advantage of nuclear, natch. It was a classic example of the Blob at work. BEIS is still wedded to nuclear. The only way it can be remotely competitive is, frankly, if they cheat.
I'm not surprised that sand has an even more corrosive impact on wind turbines than salt water in the air.
Point is, neither are exactly benign conditions for kit to have a long life....
The tidal systems that are of especial interest (to me) are the non-lagoon types.
There has been quite a bit of work put into what are, effectively, underwater versions of a wind turbine. Mount them on the bottom, out of the wave action. The big issue is accessibility for maintenance.
The advantage of this approach is that you don't need to *start* with a multi-billion project that will get the environmental protection types on the war path. You can install one turbine and scale from there.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
The Four Feathers is very good.
Goodbye Mr Chips from the same year as Gone With The Wind - indeed, Robert Donat beat Clark Gable to the Oscar for Best Actor.
1939 was an amazing year for movies. Wizard of Oz as well
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
You obviously find reading numbers difficult, the Scottish numbers are much much smaller than the English numbers , hence the cartoon, is that simple enough.
What is also so remarkable is that that cartoon was published by the Herald.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
btw if anyone wants to see what defunding the police looks or could look like in practice then Flint Town (on Netflix) gives a great picture of the dynamics of police funding in the US.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
So what are we down to now?
Couple of slaver statues gone, the Major told to stop saying "n*gg*r" and a racist welder getting sacked.
This Cultural Revolution of ours is lacking a certain pizzazz.
You forgot the unfortunately unobservant chap having a jimmy riddle almost but not quite on the memorial to a PC to which a Tory MP took great exception.
I love this. If there are two US imports we could do with in this country it is (1) cheerleaders and (2) a written constitution. In a forced choice I would reluctantly choose the latter.
btw if anyone wants to see what defunding the police looks or could look like in practice then Flint Town (on Netflix) gives a great picture of the dynamics of police funding in the US.
It is in any case a great series.
An interesting *real* question is whether, in the UK, we want to move more of the social work function away from the police.
In the US this is a disaster because of the culture and training (lack of) of the police.
In the UK, a classic example is a local PCSO who spends her morning having a half hour chat with each of our local homeless*.
*All back - apparently they stayed in the shelters as long as they could. Then the fighting and general agro got too much for them.
Have you got it on your bedroom wall to give the finger to and laugh at every morning?
"UNDER THE MOON OF LOVE with my PRETTY LITTLE ANGEL EYES!"
I just happen to think it is one of the biggest publicity seeking goofs a politician has ever made. Sorry to all those who disagree with me if my making the point repeatedly upsets you, but that's how it is.
I was told I was the only person thinking this, but I was told BLM weren't anti Semitic marxists who want to defund the police a couple of days ago, and Sir Keir was having to distance himself from them for just those reasons yesterday. So when others back me up, I like to link to it
The suit, fair point. If I were a floating voter that might give me pause for thought.
But otherwise? Hardly. There is a small minority of the population whose instinctive reaction to seeing it is a genuine and profound unease - anger even - that the Labour leader is demeaning himself by "kneeling to the Black Man" but these are votes which would be hard for Labour to get in any event and it's arguable whether they even want them.
Of course I could be wrong about it being a small minority. In which case there is a problem - that Labour can't win elections without pandering to racism.
A polling organisation could settle the question very easily by asking a question such as (I'm sure it could be improved):
What is closest to your view of the meaning of the Black Lives Matter "taking a knee" gesture?
- Expressing support for an anti-racism message in response to events such as the killing of George Floyd
- Expressing support for defunding the police
I doubt there will be such a poll, because it is obvious to anyone without an unhealthy obsession that the first answer would get a huge majority.
(What's with the suit stuff by the way? I didn't even notice it!)
Yes, I'm confident that is right. There are people getting worked up about what BLM really stands for but it's a smallish number and I don't see many potential Labour voters in there.
The suit? Well @isam is of the view it says "Showaddywaddy" - a pop group from decades ago - and I sometimes like to humour him to keep our exchanges benign.
You're perhaps not familiar with Showaddywaddy - in which case hats off. They were rubbish but did have a few hits. Singles, I mean. They weren't really an album band.
Study on! Showaddywaddy are a Leicester band, and we have had enough abuse for the day.
- A thousand apologies! And OK they did have a few catchy tunes.
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
In which case, focus on the Swansea Bay lagoon having a 120 year minimum life. The offshore wind will need to be completely replaced in - at best - 40 years. Given the rigours of the North Sea, quite possibly less (in the US deserts, some have barely lasted 18 years). Again, replacement will be by imports. The sea walls will just need the odd bit of patching up - they could quite possibly last centuries. Then it is down to turbine replacements. La Rance tidal barrage in France has just upgraded its turbines. They should last another sixty years. It produces the cheapest electricity in France. (Which they then export to the UK at top dollar).
Plus the Swansea Lagoon will be a piece of local infrastructure to regenerate the place, used for sport, leisure, the arts. Wind and solar farms get hidden behind high fences and wire; nuclear plants need armed guards. Not exactly local amenities...
Tidal can compete with offshore wind, with now prices at Cardiff sub-£50. Alternativly, you could have a slightly higher price for a 35 year contract for differences - and then 85 years at around £10. Now THAT is a legacy asset.
Oh, and the reason for comparing with nuclear? That is the metric that was used by the UK government. When it sent its report up to Government in 2018, condemning Swansea as "too expensive", one of the numbers was wrong by £30 billion, another by £60 billion - both to the advantage of nuclear, natch. It was a classic example of the Blob at work. BEIS is still wedded to nuclear. The only way it can be remotely competitive is, frankly, if they cheat.
I have to agree with you, MM. A massive construction project financed at low interest rates, built by UK businesses, and which actually delivered reliable cheap energy seems, if not a non-brainer, then at the very least eminently worth of consideration.
They don't have the lobbyists, or the people working in the Department on secondment, or the revolving door for retired ministers/civil servants that other parts of the energy industry do.
I oppose the recent moves to politicize the civil service, but the status quo is pretty poor. It's riddled with special interest capture that needs addressing, but the changes currently being made are at best as bad in a different way.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
I have wanted to watch again for some time, just never had 4 hours to spare on it. Remember it as a great film but that may be down to the mists of time.
Apparently the Leicester Lockdown is partly due to the fact the 'sweat shops' there stayed open during the crisis.
Top draw Brexiteer trolling from Andrew Bridgen there. Masterful. Almost Trumpian. He really is coming into his own, the boy.
Yes, the rag trade in Leicester is either very specialist, or stays viable by doing quick fast fashion quicker than the Far East can turnaround, so several places switched to making PPE and kept working. It is an agile trade, but always a lot of sweated labour practices.
Because mechanisation is more expensive* than cheap labour.....
*Well, often would require more intelligent management to make it competitive. Easier to find people to work for 5p an hour less. And then another 5p...
I don't really know anything about Leicester apart from it being in the worst half of the Midlands. Everyone knows that West Midlands is Best Midlands.
btw if anyone wants to see what defunding the police looks or could look like in practice then Flint Town (on Netflix) gives a great picture of the dynamics of police funding in the US.
It is in any case a great series.
An interesting *real* question is whether, in the UK, we want to move more of the social work function away from the police.
In the US this is a disaster because of the culture and training (lack of) of the police.
In the UK, a classic example is a local PCSO who spends her morning having a half hour chat with each of our local homeless*.
*All back - apparently they stayed in the shelters as long as they could. Then the fighting and general agro got too much for them.
I think it is also a problem in the UK where the police are used for all kinds of mental health management issues.
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
In which case, focus on the Swansea Bay lagoon having a 120 year minimum life. The offshore wind will need to be completely replaced in - at best - 40 years. Given the rigours of the North Sea, quite possibly less (in the US deserts, some have barely lasted 18 years). Again, replacement will be by imports. The sea walls will just need the odd bit of patching up - they could quite possibly last centuries. Then it is down to turbine replacements. La Rance tidal barrage in France has just upgraded its turbines. They should last another sixty years. It produces the cheapest electricity in France. (Which they then export to the UK at top dollar).
Plus the Swansea Lagoon will be a piece of local infrastructure to regenerate the place, used for sport, leisure, the arts. Wind and solar farms get hidden behind high fences and wire; nuclear plants need armed guards. Not exactly local amenities...
Tidal can compete with offshore wind, with now prices at Cardiff sub-£50. Alternativly, you could have a slightly higher price for a 35 year contract for differences - and then 85 years at around £10. Now THAT is a legacy asset.
Oh, and the reason for comparing with nuclear? That is the metric that was used by the UK government. When it sent its report up to Government in 2018, condemning Swansea as "too expensive", one of the numbers was wrong by £30 billion, another by £60 billion - both to the advantage of nuclear, natch. It was a classic example of the Blob at work. BEIS is still wedded to nuclear. The only way it can be remotely competitive is, frankly, if they cheat.
I have to agree with you, MM. A massive construction project financed at low interest rates, built by UK businesses, and which actually delivered reliable cheap energy seems, if not a non-brainer, then at the very least eminently worth of consideration.
They don't have the lobbyists, or the people working in the Department on secondment, or the revolving door for retired ministers/civil servants that other parts of the energy industry do.
I oppose the recent moves to politicize the civil service, but the status quo is pretty poor. It's riddled with special interest capture that needs addressing, but the changes currently being made are at best as bad in a different way.
The special interest capture is so true.
Someone had the gall to raise the revolving door issue on the Spearfish torpedo upgrade project. Literally - "If you do this, how are we supposed to get jobs in the industry?"
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
Indeed. Currently offshore wind is expensive but well understood and at least mostly functional.
Offshore wind is not expensive. It is now around £40 mW/h. What it is is unreliable. That is why you pay a vast premium for nuclear - £92.50 for Hinkley. Why tidal is such a threat to nuclear is that a series of tidal lagoons around the coast provide that reliabily, that baseload. Want to know how much tidal power will be producing on 30 July 2120? Check a tide chart. Want to know how much wind will be producing 30th June 2020? Have a guess....
Certainty plus reliability. Tidal is a no-brainer.
I thought the reason we pay £92.50 for Hinkley is Osborne screwed up by signing that contract. I'm a big fan of his generally but that was one of his greatest mistakes.
The issue is that win is £40 mW/h and that price is going down. That's become the baseline to compare new projects to now unfortunately - I suspect had Cardiff been ready at the same time as Hinkley it would have been signed up to then but now people are expecting cheaper.
And I imagine there's an element in BEIS of not wanting to admit Hinkley is a mistake. The same reason as to why no matter how much HS2 gets more expensive it is always (only just) worth doing anyway.
The final decision to go ahead with Hinkley C was taken by Theresa May.
The final decision not to support Swansea Bay was taken by Theresa May.
Goege Osborne was (and remains) a firm believer in the merits of Swansea Bay and other tidal lagoons.
Yet another strike against the worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
You and @DecrepiterJohnL really are a precious pair when it comes to ignorance of how jaw-droppingly useless some of our nineteenth and twentieth century PMs were.
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
Indeed. Currently offshore wind is expensive but well understood and at least mostly functional.
Offshore wind is not expensive. It is now around £40 mW/h. What it is is unreliable. That is why you pay a vast premium for nuclear - £92.50 for Hinkley. Why tidal is such a threat to nuclear is that a series of tidal lagoons around the coast provide that reliabily, that baseload. Want to know how much tidal power will be producing on 30 July 2120? Check a tide chart. Want to know how much wind will be producing 30th June 2020? Have a guess....
Certainty plus reliability. Tidal is a no-brainer.
Wind power forecasts at an aggregate level - for the all-Island Irish grid, say, are pretty good. The biggest problems there have been are the same sorts of ones that also occasionally knock out an entire gas/nuclear plant due to the grid connection failing unexpectedly.
btw if anyone wants to see what defunding the police looks or could look like in practice then Flint Town (on Netflix) gives a great picture of the dynamics of police funding in the US.
It is in any case a great series.
An interesting *real* question is whether, in the UK, we want to move more of the social work function away from the police.
In the US this is a disaster because of the culture and training (lack of) of the police.
In the UK, a classic example is a local PCSO who spends her morning having a half hour chat with each of our local homeless*.
*All back - apparently they stayed in the shelters as long as they could. Then the fighting and general agro got too much for them.
I think it is also a problem in the UK where the police are used for all kinds of mental health management issues.
There is also the question of breadth of experience - a friend who worked as a Special Constable thought that "targeting efficiency" of the police was a problem.
That is, the police were being increasingly withdrawn (at one point) from "useless" patrolling - so they stopped meeting ordinary people being ordinary. So they only met criminals and victims. Which then had an effect on their (the police officers) world view.
Some good news for the never kneelers. Gone With the Wind is back on Netflix!
At last, another opportunity to not watch it.
Indeed; it’s a mystery why it is so highly regarded as a film.
Plenty of reasons. It was made out of a block buster novel. The studio conducted a masterful PR exercise in "the hunt for Scarlett" where nearly every actress in Hollywood, short of Shirley Temple and Margaret Dumont tested for the part. For its time it was technically advanced and swept the Oscars. It was a huge commercial success, and still easily holds the record for "bums on seats". As a piece of art its clearly flawed, with several directors having a hand in it, and then of course its treatment of "the noble South" and "happy negroes" are as problematic today as they were then. On the bright side it did have the first African American Oscar win in Hattie McDaniel (Mammie).
Yes, fair comments. I really mean that when you watch it as a film nowadays, it isn’t apparent what all the fuss was about.
Disagree. I watched it for the first time last year.
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
Japan: no interference with civil liberties, 8 deaths per million.
UK: 3 months of house arrest, if not solitary confinement sometimes. 642 deaths per million.
Putting aside the sensationalist language, it is absurd to claim that without lockdown there would have been fewer deaths.
The choices are stark - death by virus or effective death by lockdown turning your life into a mere existence.
I think I would rather take my chances with the virus. I might lose, but I am more likely to win. With lockdown I lose every time.
When it comes to things which only affect you like motorbike riding or skiing this attitude is fair enough. But you getting the virus (possibly symptomless) significantly increases the chances that someone else ends up in hospital or dies in a care home. That is just point blank irresponsible.
Maybe life in a cage suits you, but its killing me
I agree. The Spiked article is by an NHS GP who has found that the media won't listen to him.
His argument is that the NHS isn't run this way. It must put a price on a life or the demands on it would become infinite. NICE tries to do this, er except when politicians interfere and decide that cancer deaths are worse than stroke or MS deaths or SARS-COV-2 deaths are worse than flu deaths.
@MarqueeMark I think comparing the Lagoon project to Hinckley does you no favours. Quite frankly the Hinckley project was a mistake in hindsight and were it to be repeated would not be signed in this climate. I don't think it's a baseline you want to be compared against.
Surely the economic development in green energy of recent years has been offshore wind. Surely I would think arguments of reliability, risk and cost effectiveness should be made against offshore wind and not Hinckley.
Indeed. Currently offshore wind is expensive but well understood and at least mostly functional.
Offshore wind is not expensive. It is now around £40 mW/h. What it is is unreliable. That is why you pay a vast premium for nuclear - £92.50 for Hinkley. Why tidal is such a threat to nuclear is that a series of tidal lagoons around the coast provide that reliabily, that baseload. Want to know how much tidal power will be producing on 30 July 2120? Check a tide chart. Want to know how much wind will be producing 30th June 2020? Have a guess....
Certainty plus reliability. Tidal is a no-brainer.
I thought the reason we pay £92.50 for Hinkley is Osborne screwed up by signing that contract. I'm a big fan of his generally but that was one of his greatest mistakes.
The issue is that win is £40 mW/h and that price is going down. That's become the baseline to compare new projects to now unfortunately - I suspect had Cardiff been ready at the same time as Hinkley it would have been signed up to then but now people are expecting cheaper.
And I imagine there's an element in BEIS of not wanting to admit Hinkley is a mistake. The same reason as to why no matter how much HS2 gets more expensive it is always (only just) worth doing anyway.
The final decision to go ahead with Hinkley C was taken by Theresa May.
The final decision not to support Swansea Bay was taken by Theresa May.
Goege Osborne was (and remains) a firm believer in the merits of Swansea Bay and other tidal lagoons.
Yet another strike against the worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
You and @DecrepiterJohnL really are a precious pair when it comes to ignorance of how jaw-droppingly useless some of our nineteenth and twentieth century PMs were.
Japan: no interference with civil liberties, 8 deaths per million.
UK: 3 months of house arrest, if not solitary confinement sometimes. 642 deaths per million.
Putting aside the sensationalist language, it is absurd to claim that without lockdown there would have been fewer deaths.
The choices are stark - death by virus or effective death by lockdown turning your life into a mere existence.
I think I would rather take my chances with the virus. I might lose, but I am more likely to win. With lockdown I lose every time.
When it comes to things which only affect you like motorbike riding or skiing this attitude is fair enough. But you getting the virus (possibly symptomless) significantly increases the chances that someone else ends up in hospital or dies in a care home. That is just point blank irresponsible.
Maybe life in a cage suits you, but its killing me
I agree. The Spiked article is by an NHS GP who has found that the media won't listen to him.
His argument is that the NHS isn't run this way. It must put a price on a life or the demands on it would become infinite. NICE tries to do this, er except when politicians interfere and decide that cancer deaths are worse than stroke or MS deaths or SARS-COV-2 deaths are worse than flu deaths.
If they had a scientist speaking with the Secretary of State for Health every day at 5pm talking about smoking, motor racing, and mountaineering, without a sensible cost/benefit analysis all those things - and more - would be banned, using the same methodology as they are using to address Covid 19.
One thing I hope is addressed is the use of estate management companies. Those who haven’t bought a new-build within the last 15 years probably don’t realise that roads, green space, and even play areas that were once payed for by the local council have essentially been privatised, and are payed for by residents of each estate. This is on top of council tax.
This is not a problem in itself, the problem is lack of regulation.
At the moment it’s possible for me to sue my management company for some breach of obligation, win, and then all the legal fees and compensation be backcharged through to the residents anyway.
This is not hyperbole, this is reality. There is literally no regulation.
You are better off being a leaseholder than a freeholder on new build estates when it comes to legal protection.
Gallowgate, this became a big issue in my parish. A housing estate was built on the fringe of our rural parish. It is called a "sustainable urban development" and has it`s own green spaces etc which, as you say, have to be maintained and paid for by the development rather than the county council.
This became a big issue because some of the residents of the estate tried to get onto our parish council to force through a policy so that the cost of this maintainance was paid out of parish funds! Parishioners were furious. It didn`t happen and would, I believe, have been illegal as it would have meant paying parish council funds to some residents of the parish but not others.
The cheek, though, trying to transfer legal liabilites that they contractually agreed when they purchased their home into all of parishioners.
Can the Council "adopt" the green spaces etc?
That often happens with roads in new developments doesn't it? Not sure the legality of other stuff.
Yes - they could - but this is the point isn`t it. When the county council agreed the permissions for these SUE estates to be built (Sustainable Urban Develpoments) the SUE bit means that they are "self-sustaining" financially. So the homeowners contractually agree at purchase that they are personally liable for the maintainance of common areas (usually through a management company) - which is of course pointed out by their solicitor during the conveyancing process.
The whole point of SUEs in the first place is that the county council hits it`s new homes target without incurring any pressure on their costs through having to maintain common areas (cut grass, prune trees etc) while taking in the additional council tax. Shouldn`t be allowed in my view.
It's dodgy those living there don't get a discount on their Council Tax do they?
I think the residents are fair enough to seek to get the common areas adopted if that's what they want to vote for. Those living elsewhere paying the same Council Tax rates are getting more service.
Bear in mind that the common areas in the SUE are for use exclusively by the homeowners in the SUE. these are private facitities. If the county council were to adopt them then every parishioner in the county would be entitled to picnic on their green areas (as is the case with outer council common areas).
Are you sure about that? In most new build estates with private land being managed, they are not for use exclusively by the homeowners. They are open to the public.
SUEs are a special cohort of new-build estates. Common areas in new build estates are, I agree, in principle useable by everyone as the county council maintains (having adopted). SUEs are different. I think they are an awful concept and have caused a lot of tension in my parish.
I feel you might be slightly misinformed. New build estates typically have green areas and play-areas NOT adopted by county or metropolitan councils, and yet they are still open to the public DESPITE not being adopted.
It is RARE for green areas to be adopted by councils on ANY new-build estate built within the last 10-15 years.
Ok - maybe I used the wrong word. Instead of "adopted" I should have said that the council is "obliged to maintain".
But that is also not accurate. I'll rephrase:
It is rare for green areas on new-build estates built within the last 10-15 years to be adopted OR maintained by county/city/metropolitan councils. The service is privatised and performed by the estate management company DESPITE the areas being open to the public.
This is the normal state of affairs around the country. It's "boring" because unless you buy a house on one of these estates you are unaffected. Quite a sneaky privatisation through the back-door really.
Like I said, I don't resent it. As far as I'm concerned somebody has to pay, and the council has much more pressing matters to address. It must be fair and regulated though, and at the moment it isn't.
For developers green spaces and community areas means increasing the number of units available for commercial sale (as opposed to social/affordable units). This increases the size of the development which inflames the opposition by local residents.
It's a vicious circle which causes a tremendous amount of angst for all.
AIUI most of the numbers are set by Council Policy.
Open space is set to at least 10% by law. Housing mix both 1/2/3/4 bed and affordable is determined by local needs / Council policy, and can only adjusted by negotiation and a commuted sum to fund it somewhere else.
My - unevidenced- opinion is that eg leasehold and a management company is driven by the need to avoid to swinging costs which attach to funding future maintenance of anything the Council adopt for 25 years plus the need to create someone to maintain the place whilst allowing the developer to move on.
The latter also being driven by risk managemenrt of future claims and the ability to isolate each project within its own limited company.
Plus Councils like it as it keeps costs away from existing Nimbys / residents who have votes. The people who have not yet bought the new houses do not have votes.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
You obviously find reading numbers difficult, the Scottish numbers are much much smaller than the English numbers , hence the cartoon, is that simple enough.
What is also so remarkable is that that cartoon was published by the Herald.
Yes , they must be noticing the way the wind is blowing
Comments
I agree re: tidal but I can't see a Severn barrage (for example) ever being allowed on environmental grounds. Turbines on the floor of the Pentland Firth, yes, but the technology isn't quite there yet.
https://twitter.com/emotionalpedant/status/1277670899311935490
Despite the many and various flaws (holes in the plot, several longeurs, the absurd treatment of happy slaves) I thought it was rather magnificent, in an antique way.
One of very few films made before World War 2 which can still be watched with genuine interest and emotional satisfaction.
Others that spring to mind are Metropolis, the Wizard of Oz, Nosferatu. After that examples are hard to find...
https://reason.com/2020/06/29/swat-team-police-leo-lech-supreme-court-5th-amendment/
Headline - 37 - new low
7 days - 28
Yesterday - 5
As ever, the last 3-5 day of all data is subject to reporting issues and will be heavily updated later.
Last 5 days fo data included for completeness
Mileage may vary. All wrongs reserved. This product may contain nuts. This product may contain nutters. This product may contain trained marxist nutters.
Goodbye Mr Chips from the same year as Gone With The Wind - indeed, Robert Donat beat Clark Gable to the Oscar for Best Actor.
The original Prisoner of Zenda is excellent, worth watching for Douglas Fairbanks Jr's performance alone.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/five-garment-factories-leicester-forced-22273885
It is claimed one factory in Leicester had more than 20 Covid-19 cases including the owner himself before the city was plunged back into lockdown by the government...
There has been quite a bit of work put into what are, effectively, underwater versions of a wind turbine. Mount them on the bottom, out of the wave action. The big issue is accessibility for maintenance.
The advantage of this approach is that you don't need to *start* with a multi-billion project that will get the environmental protection types on the war path. You can install one turbine and scale from there.
Couple of slaver statues gone, the Major told to stop saying "n*gg*r" and a racist welder getting sacked.
This Cultural Revolution of ours is lacking a certain pizzazz.
It is in any case a great series.
I think.
In the US this is a disaster because of the culture and training (lack of) of the police.
In the UK, a classic example is a local PCSO who spends her morning having a half hour chat with each of our local homeless*.
*All back - apparently they stayed in the shelters as long as they could. Then the fighting and general agro got too much for them.
I oppose the recent moves to politicize the civil service, but the status quo is pretty poor. It's riddled with special interest capture that needs addressing, but the changes currently being made are at best as bad in a different way.
*Well, often would require more intelligent management to make it competitive. Easier to find people to work for 5p an hour less. And then another 5p...
Someone had the gall to raise the revolving door issue on the Spearfish torpedo upgrade project. Literally - "If you do this, how are we supposed to get jobs in the industry?"
https://politicalquarterly.blog/2020/01/28/the-worst-british-prime-minister-ever/
I'm with Paxo. Cameron was merely the worst since Lord North.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek3l9iaByro
That is, the police were being increasingly withdrawn (at one point) from "useless" patrolling - so they stopped meeting ordinary people being ordinary. So they only met criminals and victims. Which then had an effect on their (the police officers) world view.
His argument is that the NHS isn't run this way. It must put a price on a life or the demands on it would become infinite. NICE tries to do this, er except when politicians interfere and decide that cancer deaths are worse than stroke or MS deaths or SARS-COV-2 deaths are worse than flu deaths.
Never heard of this Professor Sassoon, but it turns out he isn't a real professor, he teaches at QMUL.
Open space is set to at least 10% by law.
Housing mix both 1/2/3/4 bed and affordable is determined by local needs / Council policy, and can only adjusted by negotiation and a commuted sum to fund it somewhere else.
My - unevidenced- opinion is that eg leasehold and a management company is driven by the need to avoid to swinging costs which attach to funding future maintenance of anything the Council adopt for 25 years plus the need to create someone to maintain the place whilst allowing the developer to move on.
The latter also being driven by risk managemenrt of future claims and the ability to isolate each project within its own limited company.
Plus Councils like it as it keeps costs away from existing Nimbys / residents who have votes. The people who have not yet bought the new houses do not have votes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/53236921