politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going postal: Could a Democrat victory end up lost in the post
Options
Comments
-
Sicily is on my travel list - I`ve never been - it`s such a large island, any tips on which area to aim for? We like: authentic, not too commercialised, beautiful but not flash, calm seas, villages and local restaurants.MaxPB said:
Don't it's absolutely fucking terrible. Life sappingly hot. We drove to the beach near Siracusa today, it's the only thing to do to stay cool other than staying in the hotel room where there is AC.Stocky said:
You lucky thing - I envy you. Chucking it down here.MaxPB said:Life tip - don't go to Sicily in the middle of a heatwave. It's 34 degrees today and that's the coolest it has been so far.
0 -
And if they don`t?Fysics_Teacher said:
The school should have a record of what her mark actually was even if they didn’t tell her.Stocky said:
My daughter`s schools just gave her grades - not marks. We have a Mock Exam certificate, issued back in January. I didn`t know about the "marks translated into grades" thing that you mention. That is concerning - as on second reading it does say marks not grades.Fysics_Teacher said:
The last criterion was the one I was worried about as we have not retained the scripts. Just wanting the marks and not the papers makes it a lot more likely that schools will be able to do this.Stocky said:Ydoethur - what constitutes a valid mock.
Have you seen this?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/appeals-based-on-mock-exams
The one part that may be a problem is the way the marks are translated into grades: I would think many schools to make an adjustment to allow for the expected improvement between the mock and the real thing.
One thing I’m hoping this will do is make it much easier to convince future Y11 students to take their mocks seriously...
Edit: but then again - higher up it says "mock grade".
How likely do you think it is that a CAG will be lower than a mock grade?
Williamson will get some fire over this as this is not what he promised. He never mentioned that pupil can only appeal for their mock result if the CAG is at least equal to the mock. This doesn`t align with his triple-lock promise.0 -
Don’t go to Sicily in the summer!MaxPB said:Life tip - don't go to Sicily in the middle of a heatwave. It's 34 degrees today and that's the coolest it has been so far.
The only time I went was in April several years ago which was plenty warm enough for me. We were all in shorts and tee-shirts while the locals were wrapped up in long coats and sweater.0 -
Wonderful summer day here in North Walesdixiedean said:
And I envy you. 4th consecutive day of fog. With this virus about its like living in a Stephen King novel.Stocky said:
You lucky thing - I envy you. Chucking it down here.MaxPB said:Life tip - don't go to Sicily in the middle of a heatwave. It's 34 degrees today and that's the coolest it has been so far.
0 -
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=191 -
What, for the bananas?!malcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Bit cloudier over here in the east - we had a high haar in the morning. But sun has broken through since lunchtime.0 -
I agree, it depends - it only really works if they got together before the election and agreed what they wanted to do. Note that the unitary council drive being pushed by the government also envisages as yet unspecified empowerment of parish councils to compensate for the loss of local contact by the anolition of district councils. Some parish councillors believe that they will acquire the planning powers now held by district councils - which will work OK in some cases, but not others (in many places the parish council either doesn't exist or is a strictly amateur affair).MattW said:
It depends on the Independent Group. Though for Town Councils remember that TCs have virtually no powers and tend to do the old Red Phone Box, 2 sets of swings and a local loo, and that's about it.noneoftheabove said:
Do the independents do a good job? Are they a cohesive group with a plan or "proper" independents. I've never lived in a place where independents have done well, I like the idea in principle but no idea how effective it would be in reality.
In my patch, Labour is in coalition at District level with independents (and LibDems and Greens). They are a diverse group, ranging from former Conservatives and one or two Kippers to a former left-wing trade unionist, but they are genuniely mainly interested in the town of Farnham. Farnham is blighted by what many see as a white elephant project, a half-built shopping centre with few actual shops signed up, and the independents tend to be anti-Tory as it was a Tory project.
The coalition works well because we all get on personally, and to be fair the local Tories are amicable too and we've all been working together to get the area through the Covid crisis. My view is that party politics is superfluous 90% of the time at district/parish level - good councillors do good stuff, and trying to guess who will be good by party label is an unrewarding endeavour.1 -
You'd think the Almighty might make her intentions a little easier for the rest of us to figure!NickPalmer said:
My uncle did it for many years - lots of clients paid him for his services - though he's now not well enough to pursue it. FWIW he's perfectly sincere - a very religious man, he believes that the position of the stars indicate the wishes of the Almighty.Peter_the_Punter said:
How do you 'work' as an astrologer? Who pays someone for that - the Met Office?justin124 said:I know a guy who works as an astrologer. He has taken account of Trump & Biden's time, date and place of birth details. He gives Trump a 51% chance of winning on November 3rd.
0 -
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
Hence also Johnson.Fishing said:
Yes, but there are other factors that make up Trump. He is best seen as the logical culmination of several trends that go back decades in western democracies, and America in particular:another_richard said:
Trump was the perfect candidate for the twatter era. Or turn that around and say the twatter era was perfect for Trump.
Another aspect was that it was the failure of the GOP establishment which led to Trump.
There was a decade ago on PB an American GOP supporter called StarsAndStripes.
He was scornful of the idea that Trump could get nominated by the GOP and that if he did would suffer enormous defeat.
- the devaluation of experience at the top of government, i.e. denying that you benefit from expertise
- identity politics and its associated fostering of grievance
- the dumbing down of debate through the shortening of attention spans through first TV, then social media
- the toleration of rampant back-scratching and corruption
- the relentless focus on personalities and not issues.
If you take those five trends together, you have President Trump.
And, for the record, we're on the same road on many of those trends over here. Hence that moron Corbyn.1 -
It was you blaming the EUBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
I only posted the Irish Times articlemalcolmg said:
It was you blaming the EUBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
The blind worship of the EU by some is breathtaking1 -
That's not in the article afaics.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
Catania, can't recommend it enough. Not really touristy at all, though I'm sure the current climate has something to do with that. I'd recommend knowing a fair amount of Italian though, lots of people don't speak English at all so unless you're ok with pointing and speaking loudly/slowly to get by its a but more difficult than other places I've been to in Italy.Stocky said:
Sicily is on my travel list - I`ve never been - it`s such a large island, any tips on which area to aim for? We like: authentic, not too commercialised, beautiful but not flash, calm seas, villages and local restaurants.MaxPB said:
Don't it's absolutely fucking terrible. Life sappingly hot. We drove to the beach near Siracusa today, it's the only thing to do to stay cool other than staying in the hotel room where there is AC.Stocky said:
You lucky thing - I envy you. Chucking it down here.MaxPB said:Life tip - don't go to Sicily in the middle of a heatwave. It's 34 degrees today and that's the coolest it has been so far.
1 -
Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
No, it hasn't. reread the thing. The Irish agency in question has messed up and doesn't need so many trees so the growers can't sell them to the agency. NOWHERE does it say the EU, court, lavatory attendants in Berlaymont, or any other part of it, instructed the destruction. Indeed, some of tyhe trees were sold to another customer.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
The thing I like about the Ashfield Independents is that they aren't beholden to anyone else except us.NickPalmer said:
I agree, it depends - it only really works if they got together before the election and agreed what they wanted to do. Note that the unitary council drive being pushed by the government also envisages as yet unspecified empowerment of parish councils to compensate for the loss of local contact by the anolition of district councils. Some parish councillors believe that they will acquire the planning powers now held by district councils - which will work OK in some cases, but not others (in many places the parish council either doesn't exist or is a strictly amateur affair).MattW said:
It depends on the Independent Group. Though for Town Councils remember that TCs have virtually no powers and tend to do the old Red Phone Box, 2 sets of swings and a local loo, and that's about it.noneoftheabove said:
Do the independents do a good job? Are they a cohesive group with a plan or "proper" independents. I've never lived in a place where independents have done well, I like the idea in principle but no idea how effective it would be in reality.
In my patch, Labour is in coalition at District level with independents (and LibDems and Greens). They are a diverse group, ranging from former Conservatives and one or two Kippers to a former left-wing trade unionist, but they are genuniely mainly interested in the town of Farnham. Farnham is blighted by what many see as a white elephant project, a half-built shopping centre with few actual shops signed up, and the independents tend to be anti-Tory as it was a Tory project.
The coalition works well because we all get on personally, and to be fair the local Tories are amicable too and we've all been working together to get the area through the Covid crisis. My view is that party politics is superfluous 90% of the time at district/parish level - good councillors do good stuff, and trying to guess who will be good by party label is an unrewarding endeavour.
One heck of a punchup coming if they try and unitary-ise Nottinghamshire.0 -
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=191 -
Yes, Catania is quite a place. A great trip across from there to Kefalonia one year.MaxPB said:
Catania, can't recommend it enough. Not really touristy at all, though I'm sure the current climate has something to do with that. I'd recommend knowing a fair amount of Italian though, lots of people don't speak English at all so unless you're ok with pointing and speaking loudly/slowly to get by its a but more difficult than other places I've been to in Italy.Stocky said:
Sicily is on my travel list - I`ve never been - it`s such a large island, any tips on which area to aim for? We like: authentic, not too commercialised, beautiful but not flash, calm seas, villages and local restaurants.MaxPB said:
Don't it's absolutely fucking terrible. Life sappingly hot. We drove to the beach near Siracusa today, it's the only thing to do to stay cool other than staying in the hotel room where there is AC.Stocky said:
You lucky thing - I envy you. Chucking it down here.MaxPB said:Life tip - don't go to Sicily in the middle of a heatwave. It's 34 degrees today and that's the coolest it has been so far.
0 -
And that sheriffs are elected.Peter_the_Punter said:
Didn't know that. Again it helps to understand how dreadful incidents like the Floyd killing happen.Fysics_Teacher said:
I think another problem is the huge number of different police forces. In the UK we have 48; in the US (with admittedly five times the population) they have just under 18 thousand. As there are about 800,000 police officers, this means the mean police force has fewer than 50 officers.Peter_the_Punter said:
Lol! Illuminating. I remember being told that in France you were unlikely to be allowed into the police if you were too smart. Didn't know it applied in the US too.Fysics_Teacher said:
Many US police forces have an IQ (or equivalent) test as part of the application. If you get too high a score you are rejected.Peter_the_Punter said:
The overwhelming impression is of stunning incompetence.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9Y2UJUhL74
Don't know if anyone has seen this but the whole video of the George Floyd death has been released. I believe this isn't the whole video but it's still useful context nonetheless.
I wish this were a joke, but it is not.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CoK4MEI43vI
As a student working on a gas station in San Francisco many years ago I remember becoming acquainted with a number of the local cops. They were far from dumb, but they did tend to regard themselves as 'hired guns'.
That same summer I drove across the States and was stopped one night by a couple of cops in a small town in Nebraska. I've met more intelligent cows.
More recently I've been pulled over in NY State a couple of times. The word arrogance springs to mind rather than stupidity. Guess i t depends where you are.0 -
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.0 -
The article states that Mr Ryan said the critical factor that has given the business a heart attack was a European Court of Justice case in recent years that found environment assessment, partly the forest licensing process, were not sufficiently rigorousCarnyx said:Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
No, it hasn't. reread the thing. The Irish agency in question has messed up and doesn't need so many trees so the growers can't sell them to the agency. NOWHERE does it say the EU, court, lavatory attendants in Berlaymont, or any other part of it, instructed the destruction. Indeed, some of tyhe trees were sold to another customer.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Red tape creating eco vandalism0 -
Does anyone know when the next review of travel quarantine exemptions (corridors) is?0
-
Reading the Irish Times article, it seems these saplings are surplus because the Irish department of Forestry has been too slow to approve areas to re forest, in turn due to lack of adequate environmental assessment.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
It does seem reasonable to me that environmental impacts of reafforestation are adequately assessed before mass plantings.0 -
Sorry if all this has been said before about postal voting: I would dearly love Trump to lose and I almost never support what he says; but despite that there is a problem with trust in postal voting. Lots of people support it because it is convenient and sensible - and they are people who would not dream of subverting the process. But not everyone is as nice as the typical voter.
How is it possible to support a system where if you turn up at the polling booth there is the presence of officials to ensure that each vote is secret and free from influence or coercion, and then allow as part of the same system people to vote in a way that is completely unregulated and could be subject to influence, control or coercion?
The principle which applies here is that if a thing can happen it will happen. It erodes trust and slightly subverts the democratic process.
1 -
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.1 -
Goodness, Farnham is not a place I ever thought I'd see mentioned on here. I used to live not too far away.0
-
Rookie error, introducing them facts.Carnyx said:Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
No, it hasn't. reread the thing. The Irish agency in question has messed up and doesn't need so many trees so the growers can't sell them to the agency. NOWHERE does it say the EU, court, lavatory attendants in Berlaymont, or any other part of it, instructed the destruction. Indeed, some of tyhe trees were sold to another customer.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It's Court hasCarnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
0 -
Is it the case that Scotland used to be heavily forested? And thus are the bare hills of (say) Glen Coe a human thing? (Anything to stop them building a McDonalds's)Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Edit: sorry, Good evening all.0 -
I agree, but you can plant them in the wrong places, which is what this is about...Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
My god! I agree with Adonis!CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
For example, they must never be planted anywhere near an EU official, in case the intellectual comparison is to the tree’s advantage.Foxy said:
I agree, but you can plant them in the wrong places, which is what this is about...Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=195 -
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.1 -
Someone should tell Paul Staines that Ireland isn't going to leave the EU and his passport is going to stay burgundy coloured.0
-
0
-
It's good to see Adonis moving on from his euromadness albeit to tell Labour a truth they will not listen to.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
you can if no-one wants to buy them. Saying that plenty of Scotland could do with reforesting but it is kept bare so a handful of toffs can shoot grouse.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
I think Starmer is listening. Labour can only win a GE if it gets people who are ideologically conservative to vote for it. He is going to be muted on some subjects (e.g. criticising Brexit) and will take every opportunity to create the impression that the LP is patriotic. Basically, trying to repair the damage that Corbyn and his acolytes did.felix said:
It's good to see Adonis moving on from his euromadness albeit to tell Labour a truth they will not listen to.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Far from causing WW3, he helped end the Cold War.Fishing said:
Your point being?Sunil_Prasannan said:
"Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Reagan in Berlin, 1987.Fishing said:
Reagan's Evil Empire speech, combined with Soviet paranoia, damn nearly caused World War 3.Malmesbury said:
Reagan wasn't just an actor. He had a complex and surprisingly intellectual background - he wrote many of his own speeches over the years. The acting was just his career before he moved into politics full time. Where he became a popular and successful Governor of California for 2 terms.
As opposed to Trump. Who after a lifetime of staggering from one shitty business deal to another....
Telling the truth does that sometimes.
Thank God for Gordievsky.0 -
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
I did as well in Alresford which was lovely.CorrectHorseBattery said:Goodness, Farnham is not a place I ever thought I'd see mentioned on here. I used to live not too far away.
0 -
You only see nature in instrumental terms? What of intrinsic value? Insect life, amphibians, birds, lower canopy botany?IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=193 -
I quite like gloomy and impenetrable woods. I like grouse moors too. Neither of these places are biologically rich (like a rain-forest) but they are biologically strong.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
I'll happily go with 'unrewarding' if this is what it looks like.0 -
Every month our solar panels report states how the equivalent is offset with trees.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Last month is was the equivalent of 7 trees0 -
I would not express it that way but I agree 100% with the sentimentmalcolmg said:
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
“Leaving it to the politicians is one of the most stupid ideas I’ve seen here. Leaving it to the politicians has got has got us to the terrible situation we are in today, 30 years after the science of global warming was clear and almost no progress made since.”kamski said:
Leaving it to the industrialists is one of the most stupid ideas I've seen on here. Leaving it to the industrialists has got us to the terrible situation we are in today, 30 years after the science of global warming was clear and almost no progress made since.LostPassword said:
Not all of them - those that own coal plants and mines will be lobbying hard for taxes and regulation on renewables so that they can slow down the transition as much as possible, and make as much money as possible in the interim.Fysics_Teacher said:
Solar power is already competitive with fossil fuels without having to be subsided in many parts of the world and the article I linked to above suggests that it’s going to get substantially (about a third) better In the next few years.kamski said:
I would seriously question the idea that Trump's foreign policy has been "quite benign". So definitely not "unquestionably". Even without global overheating there is a lot to criticise in foreign policy terms.moonshine said:
I did raise this in the context of what is generally a relatively favourable (and unquestionably quite benign) foreign policy record. To liberally paraphrase, the Brain Trust here conclude that only the “gullible” see this deal as good news and it’s actually all about setting up an anti Shia alliance to start world war 3 in Trump’s second term. Or something.another_richard said:Re Trump
Has anyone mentioned his diplomatic triumph of the Israel-UAE deal ?
I'm curious as to whether any PBers are big enough to admit Trump has done well in this case.
I hope Trump loses because I don’t like his undermining of democratic principles and personal conduct, which sets an appalling example to kids worldwide. But I don’t live in the US so am overall fairly ambivalent to the result if he delivers a second term roughly in keeping with his first with respect to China policy and the economy.
The very best thing about Trump losing now is it reduces the chances of an AOC presidency down the line.
When you take his pro catastrophic global overheating policies into account, his foreign policy is unquestionably by far the worst of any US president ever. There isn't going to be any kind of peaceful world if we carry on burning fossil fuels like Trump wants.
Wind generated power is on a similar track.
This means that coal is rapidly turning into an expensive as well as dirty option which is the point where all the money grubbing capitalists abandon it without having to be told to.
This process has already been seen in the US and Australia, with attempts to charge people with solar panels a tax to "support the electricity grid" - aka subsidise coal.
Until that is the industrialists drove down the cost of wind and solar so that it’s marginal cost is below coal almost everywhere and pushed electric vehicles total cost of ownership below that if diesel and petrol.
I suggest next month you watch the Tesla Battery Investor presentation. It’s industrialists that are finally changing the world for the better, while politicians of blue, red and even green stripes the world over have achieved barely a jot.1 -
Don't listen to them! Those bastards are power hungry, just looking for their place in the sun.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Every month our solar panels report states how the equivalent is offset with trees.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Last month is was the equivalent of 7 trees0 -
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.0 -
But that should be the Country's choice, not some EU quangoFoxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.0 -
I'm afraid the arseholes may be getting into owning any new woodland as well.malcolmg said:
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
'Super-rich buying up Scotland’s forests'
https://tinyurl.com/yyk83brj0 -
It is. The European Court just requires them to assess environmental impacts.Big_G_NorthWales said:
But that should be the Country's choice, not some EU quangoFoxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.0 -
Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan0
-
But why should they be involvedFoxy said:
It is. The European Court just requires them to assess environmental impacts.Big_G_NorthWales said:
But that should be the Country's choice, not some EU quangoFoxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.0 -
You may not like Guido but maybe best to check the message first before shooting the messengerCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan
And by the way the source was the Irish Times0 -
What, killing people?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I would not express it that way but I agree 100% with the sentimentmalcolmg said:
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
Yesterday, there was a big discussion about 'assholes' - today it is good old British 'arseholes' being discussed - which I call progress.0
-
To be fair, BigG, EU has done some great things environmental-wise e.g. re-wilding initiatives.Big_G_NorthWales said:
But why should they be involvedFoxy said:
It is. The European Court just requires them to assess environmental impacts.Big_G_NorthWales said:
But that should be the Country's choice, not some EU quangoFoxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.0 -
Thanks, I will look there.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You may not like Guido but maybe best to check the message first before shooting the messengerCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan
And by the way the source was the Irish Times
You can't go to the Guido site and think this is the hallmark of quality though, surely. It looks like it was designed by a toddler and violates all kinds of usability guidelines. From a web UX POV it drives me insane.0 -
Of course not but I have no time at all for Scots landownersIshmaelZ said:
What, killing people?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I would not express it that way but I agree 100% with the sentimentmalcolmg said:
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
CorrectHorseBattery said:
Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan
The Irish Times was the source.
0 -
"The Scottish Conservatives 'badly need the Scottish Labour party to revive between now and next May' says Prof. Curtice"
https://tinyurl.com/y4rvnq2v
'“So, arguably, the really difficult strategic difficulty that faces the leader of the Scottish Conservative party and faces Boris Johnson is that they badly need the Scottish Labour party to revive between now and next May.
“Because it may well be that on that the chances of denying the SNP an overall majority rests.”
Curtice said that much of the SNP’s success in the December 2019 general election came from winning back votes that it had lost to Labour in 2017.
He added that between a third and 40 per cent of the Labour vote supports independence.
“That’s where the action probably is,” he said.'''
Strokes chin.
I wonder what cunning plan Lab had to win back between a third and 40 per cent of the Labour vote that supports independence?
0 -
As someone who owns several square ft of Scotland, I find that unfair!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Of course not but I have no time at all for Scots landownersIshmaelZ said:
What, killing people?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I would not express it that way but I agree 100% with the sentimentmalcolmg said:
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=190 -
I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.Foxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.
Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.1 -
Thank you kindly. I will seek it out from there.Martin_Kinsella said:CorrectHorseBattery said:Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan
The Irish Times was the source.0 -
Sicily.
1. Don’t go in August. Far too hot. It can easily get over 40 degrees. And there are lots of crowds.
2. Palermo is well worth exploring.
3. Selinunte and Segesta are wonderful for their Greek temples, as is Agrigento.
4. Siracusa is a must especially if you can get tickets to the Greek theatre there. I saw a superb production of Antigone there.
5. Sciacca is lovely and Ragusa.
6. Taormina is the Amalfi of Sicily.
7. Try and visit one of the Aeolian Islands.
8. You must eat genuine Sicilian arancini di riso. Malvasia sweet wine is also delicious.4 -
I source lots of stories across twitter, the guardian, sky, BBC, and occasionally GuidoCorrectHorseBattery said:
Thanks, I will look there.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You may not like Guido but maybe best to check the message first before shooting the messengerCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan
And by the way the source was the Irish Times
You can't go to the Guido site and think this is the hallmark of quality though, surely. It looks like it was designed by a toddler and violates all kinds of usability guidelines. From a web UX POV it drives me insane.
I always look to the source not the messenger0 -
Guido is one step away from one of those dodgy sites you used to use in the mid 2000s to illegally download films. Hope they can hire a decent UX team soon, not pleasurable to use whatsoever.0
-
I have no idea what you are alleging hereCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido is one step away from one of those dodgy sites you used to use in the mid 2000s to illegally download films. Hope they can hire a decent UX team soon, not pleasurable to use whatsoever.
-1 -
Belarus
No notable pro government rallies
Too many people to shoot now on the streets
President Big Hat is either:
continuing to stall before a crackdown, which will need the army (or a 3rd party) and an unprecedented effort
or
hoping to release some steam in the hope that things will lose a lot of their momentum
or
he is done and someone somewhere is trying to work out what happens next
At one point a couple of days ago the regime blamed the British amongst a couple of others for stirring all this trouble. How exactly the F.C.O managed this is unclear. Perhaps the British Council used the cover of a cultural event, such as Morris Dancing in Minsk, to infiltrate provocateurs into the country at the start of the year.
Should a book ever be written about MI6's alleged involvement in the Belarus protests and contextualising it as part of UK intelligence's century old association with White Russians, I have dibs on the title 'Morris Dancing in Minsk'.
0 -
I was commenting on the poor usability and design of their site.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I source lots of stories across twitter, the guardian, sky, BBC, and occasionally GuidoCorrectHorseBattery said:
Thanks, I will look there.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You may not like Guido but maybe best to check the message first before shooting the messengerCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido Fawkes is trash, does somebody have the story from a less biased and crap source please? Their website looks like a clone of 4Chan
And by the way the source was the Irish Times
You can't go to the Guido site and think this is the hallmark of quality though, surely. It looks like it was designed by a toddler and violates all kinds of usability guidelines. From a web UX POV it drives me insane.
I always look to the source not the messenger
To be fair, the Guardian is not good either.0 -
I agree it's horrid and I don't read it as a habit, but we post on a website that a well-meaning person hacked and changed the name to 'Palatialbetting' yesterday and it doesn't appear to have been changed back, so I don't think we can talk.CorrectHorseBattery said:Guido is one step away from one of those dodgy sites you used to use in the mid 2000s to illegally download films. Hope they can hire a decent UX team soon, not pleasurable to use whatsoever.
0 -
I am from a purely analytical POV, providing some insight into their site. I work in software engineering and I work in my current role, in web development.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have no idea what you are alleging hereCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido is one step away from one of those dodgy sites you used to use in the mid 2000s to illegally download films. Hope they can hire a decent UX team soon, not pleasurable to use whatsoever.
0 -
I think you get a pass there !!!!!!Luckyguy1983 said:
As someone who owns several square ft of Scotland, I find that unfair!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Of course not but I have no time at all for Scots landownersIshmaelZ said:
What, killing people?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I would not express it that way but I agree 100% with the sentimentmalcolmg said:
far better to shoot the arseholes that own the grouse moorsIshmaelZ said:
Slowly, inefficiently and impermanently. And I like shooting grouse.malcolmg said:
apart from sooking up CO2 perhaps? Assume also you know nothing of grouse moors.IshmaelZ said:
That is nonsense, the interior of the average wood is gloomy, impenetrable and biologically impoverished. If you don't want timber to build with or burn, nor somewhere to harbour animals to hunt, they are about the most unrewarding use of land imaginable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You can never grow too many treesmalcolmg said:
As Carnyx said it is the Irish growers etc that have grown far too many and the EU don't need them , usual made up bollox of blaming the EU when it is nothing to do with themMaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=191 -
It seems that it arises from this case:Fysics_Teacher said:
I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.Foxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.
Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ireland-fined-5m-euro-over-environmental-assessment-of-wind-farm-38684853.html
https://www.clientearth.org/court-of-justice-comes-down-hard-on-persistent-failures-to-assess-the-environmental-impacts-of-projects/
The Windfarm was built without an environmental impact, caused a massive landslide, hence the requirement to do so in the future. There also seems to be an issue of issuing retrospective approvals.0 -
No true, that seems a very serious vulnerability. Has anyone published how they were able to change it, was it SQL injection?Luckyguy1983 said:
I agree it's horrid and I don't read it as a habit, but we post on a website that a well-meaning person hacked and changed the name to 'Palatialbetting' yesterday and it doesn't appear to have been changed back, so I don't think we can talk.CorrectHorseBattery said:Guido is one step away from one of those dodgy sites you used to use in the mid 2000s to illegally download films. Hope they can hire a decent UX team soon, not pleasurable to use whatsoever.
As for the general site, I am sorry to say the main site here is very poorly designed too and does not fit into current web standards at all.
Vanilla is at least relatively modern, so I use that to look at the messages.0 -
You do realise that that shows that the current government is therefore spending more money on the NHS than any other government in history?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Looking at the rate at which spending is changing can be helpful, but it is not nearly as significant as the actual amount of spending.1 -
Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.
The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.0 -
Lol. Adonis claims "health spending have (sic) plummeted" and then adds a graph showing the opposite.Fysics_Teacher said:
You do realise that that shows that the current government is therefore spending more money on the NHS than any other government in history?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Looking at the rate at which spending is changing can be helpful, but it is not nearly as significant as the actual amount of spending.1 -
I'm more surprised as I would have thought Guido must generate shit tonnes in ad revenue!0
-
I remember first having arancini di riso in Sicily, and I agree wholeheartedly!Cyclefree said:Sicily.
1. Don’t go in August. Far too hot. It can easily get over 40 degrees. And there are lots of crowds.
2. Palermo is well worth exploring.
3. Selinunte and Segesta are wonderful for their Greek temples, as is Agrigento.
4. Siracusa is a must especially if you can get tickets to the Greek theatre there. I saw a superb production of Antigone there.
5. Sciacca is lovely and Ragusa.
6. Taormina is the Amalfi of Sicily.
7. Try and visit one of the Aeolian Islands.
8. You must eat genuine Sicilian arancini di riso. Malvasia sweet wine is also delicious.
I am happy to accept that it is a European competence, my question is why is it a European competence.Foxy said:
It seems that it arises from this case:Fysics_Teacher said:
I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.Foxy said:
The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.Fysics_Teacher said:
But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?Foxy said:
A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?MaxPB said:
Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.Carnyx said:
Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?MaxPB said:
Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?Carnyx said:
Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is the Irish blaming the EUmalcolmg said:
Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.Carnyx said:
Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.Big_G_NorthWales said:Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU
https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19
Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.
For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.
Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ireland-fined-5m-euro-over-environmental-assessment-of-wind-farm-38684853.html
https://www.clientearth.org/court-of-justice-comes-down-hard-on-persistent-failures-to-assess-the-environmental-impacts-of-projects/
The Windfarm was built without an environmental impact, caused a massive landslide, hence the requirement to do so in the future. There also seems to be an issue of issuing retrospective approvals.0 -
Taormina is where most first time visitors end up; a beautiful, but touristy, spot that fails most of your criteria.Stocky said:
Sicily is on my travel list - I`ve never been - it`s such a large island, any tips on which area to aim for? We like: authentic, not too commercialised, beautiful but not flash, calm seas, villages and local restaurants.MaxPB said:
Don't it's absolutely fucking terrible. Life sappingly hot. We drove to the beach near Siracusa today, it's the only thing to do to stay cool other than staying in the hotel room where there is AC.Stocky said:
You lucky thing - I envy you. Chucking it down here.MaxPB said:Life tip - don't go to Sicily in the middle of a heatwave. It's 34 degrees today and that's the coolest it has been so far.
Avoid Catania.
Siracusa is a great spot, both for itself and the striking inland towns (Noto, Ragusa) that are within reasonable reach. Or, for the more adventurous, stay inland and visit the coast.
Palermo is underrated and well worth a visit, and perfectly safe with a bit of common sense. Driving there is for the adventurous only: where locals regularly join the motorway by reversing at high speed up the ‘off’ sliproad, and full of no-priority four-way junctions in town where priority goes to the driver that doesn’t blink. Great fun if you enjoy that sort of thing.
Off the beaten track, but the island of Lipari is great (provided that you don’t dislike capers), as are a few of the villages just inland of the northern coast road.
Sicily is blessed with great spring and autumn weather, stunning food (especially from the sea), and the wines have a good reputation now that there is a better than evens chance that the contents of the bottle bear at least some relation to the writing on the label.1 -
It looks dodgy, that was my point. I am sure it isn't actually dodgy but it's the kind of site I'd make sure I had my anti-virus turned on and was using HTTPS, put it that way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have no idea what you are alleging hereCorrectHorseBattery said:Guido is one step away from one of those dodgy sites you used to use in the mid 2000s to illegally download films. Hope they can hire a decent UX team soon, not pleasurable to use whatsoever.
0 -
0
-
What a hero!Fysics_Teacher said:Great headline of the day:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-537920160 -
It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.CorrectHorseBattery said:Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.
The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.0 -
https://twitter.com/ZeObserver/status/1294368146900516869
Huh, interesting to see London has the highest Labour defectors due to Brexit.0 -
Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.RobD said:
It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.CorrectHorseBattery said:Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.
The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.
There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.
This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.0 -
The new Corbynite angle seems to be attacking Keir Starmer for supporting a second referendum.
You know who also pushed for that position?
John McDonnell and Diane Abbott. How come they don't get named and shamed?0 -
http://news.sky.com/story/labour-accused-of-trying-to-destroy-its-left-wing-elements-by-corbyn-backing-momentum-12049975CorrectHorseBattery said:The new Corbynite angle seems to be attacking Keir Starmer for supporting a second referendum.
You know who also pushed for that position?
John McDonnell and Diane Abbott. How come they don't get named and shamed?0 -
Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.RobD said:
It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.CorrectHorseBattery said:Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.
The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.
There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.
This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.
*political blog!0
This discussion has been closed.