On the parking thing - it needs regulating. Casino rightly described the parking companies as vultures - they exist to issue tickets and send threatening letters. Operating a car park is merely their entrapment scam.
I had a run-in with one of them a decade or so back. Parked in a leisure park on the edge of the town centre. Crossed the road at the edge of the park, went into one shop for 2 minutes then into the cinema on the park. Came back and found that I had been ticketed for "leaving the leisure park".
So I went round with a camera doing my research. There was a sign with their terms and conditions. Not on the access road I entered on, not in the car park I parked in, not on the (extended) footpath to the pedestrian crossing by the cinema which I briefly crossed. Off in the other corner where no-one could see it. Whats more there's no cameras at the pedestrian crossing owned by the leisure park (just traffic cams pointing at traffic on the crossing lights).
So how had I been seen breaking the rule that I hadn't contractually accepted? Then I spotted the gnome in his cabin. Genuinely sculking about following pedestrians. Their evidence was their employee following me to catch me leaving.
Lets just say that I had fun writing the successful appeal letter...
My favourite car park experience was getting a fine for parking in my father’s parking space in a car park he owned. A half hour argument on the phone with the company where I was trying to explain to them I had done nothing wrong and desperately trying not to pull the “my dad owns the fucking car park” card ensued. Ultimately I had to say “my dad owns the fucking car park” as they wouldn’t accept the fact that they had no reason to fine me anyway.
We had exactly the same experience with a car park in central Derby (since redeveloped); except they did it to the owner (who had an agreement for free use of the car park). IIRC he sent the fine letter back to them with a letter threatening termination of the contract to lease the land. They backed down...
My wife was got last week at a retail and leisure park. 5 hour free parking limit, which she didn’t know about but no doubt is written in small print on the notice boards.
2 hours at IKEA, then in to the cinema to watch a film with our daughter. All in all 5 hours 10 minutes. £45.
This sort of stuff really pisses people off. Yes, there will be people who egregiously break the rules and try to park for free. Yes, they may want people to leave as quickly as possible at busy times. But they're taking the piss going for people who overstay by a few minutes or make honest mistakes.
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Probably a fair summary from MoonRabbit. But for me the issue has not just been Labour failing to provide a balanced budget. It has been the fact that, after promising to be a clean slate, honest with the public, honest in their own dealings and at least mildly competent, they have turned out, to a large extent, to be no better than the last lot.
They follow the same old tired, dishonest matra about everything being disastrously bad, exaggerating the black hole (as an example) and making stupid, unforced errors. They show themselves to be completely out of touch with reality when it comes to large sections of the economy and people's real lives and at the same time continue the indefensible practice of sucking up to the multinationals and the rich and powerful.
I said before the election that, although I would not vote for them, I didn't fear a Labour victory and at least they would be able to do the basic job competently. I mistook boring for competence and sadly I was wrong.
It's still early days although the signs are not promising. Sticking to the Tories pretence that quality services can be provided without adequate taxation in the light of limited economic growth is a disingenuous lie.
Labour with their enormous majority had the opportunity to come clean. They remain fearful of upsetting the Daily Mail, perhaps unaware that the Daily Mail despise them not for their fiscal policy but just because they hate them because they can. They need to do what they need to do, and to Hell with the Daily Mail. Pandering to the Daily Mail will not redistribute a fairer society. "The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate" isn't a sustainable economic model.
The Conservative offering is equally disingenuous and Hunt cutting NI twice in anticipation of an election was unequivocal dereliction of duty. The Conservatives harp on at Labour being the "high tax party" despite their recent record on taxation. If anything their outright lie is even more appalling. "Only the Conservatives can cut taxes and improve services". The politics of the magic money tree is a very tempting offer.
Only Nigel offers a realistic option. Yes he will cut your taxes, but he will also decimate your public services. If for example reduced taxes means a reduced NHS funding package Reform can look to the insurance model. The same applies to education and the social safety net ( charities can resolve that issue- or the workhouse?). If that isn't what you want don't vote Reform, although they are at least adding the sums up.
Not Labour, not Conservative, possibly Reform.
Who is missing from that list? The Spectator has an article this week chiding the LibDems for their lack of seriousness in the week Ed Davey released a charity single.
On the issue of parking fines I got a fixed penalty from a pair of traffic wardens in Wigan in about February. After we moved couldn't find a local dentist so have to drive to Wigan to see one.
Gone to take my daughter to a dentist appointment, all the spaces in front of the dentist are pay and display but were all occupied. Next to the spaces was a single yellow line so I checked the only visible signage to see what restrictions apply and it just says to pay and display so I did.
Got out of the dentist after her appointment and saw a parking fine stuck to the car. Also saw the traffic wardens just down the road so went to politely speak to then and said I'd paid and displayed.
The male warden was a dick who just said there's a single yellow line there so read the Highway Code (he should, it just means restrictions apply and those are normally on signage). I replied I'd checked the signage and it says pay and display and I had paid.
The female warden was much more polite, she replied apologetically to say that she had made a note on her system to say I had a valid paid for parking ticket displayed. She also explained that Wigan doesn't have signage for its single yellow lines (where I live they do) and said that she'd make a further note that I said I'd checked the signage and suggested I appeal.
Was busy and forgot to appeal in time, so thought I'd appeal when the inevitable fine came through the post. None ever did. That was nearly 10 months ago so not sure one ever will now. No idea if someone saw the notes and chose to cancel it, or if they're just less organised at chasing unpaid fines than the parasitical private firms.
Probably a fair summary from MoonRabbit. But for me the issue has not just been Labour failing to provide a balanced budget. It has been the fact that, after promising to be a clean slate, honest with the public, honest in their own dealings and at least mildly competent, they have turned out, to a large extent, to be no better than the last lot.
They follow the same old tired, dishonest matra about everything being disastrously bad, exaggerating the black hole (as an example) and making stupid, unforced errors. They show themselves to be completely out of touch with reality when it comes to large sections of the economy and people's real lives and at the same time continue the indefensible practice of sucking up to the multinationals and the rich and powerful.
I said before the election that, although I would not vote for them, I didn't fear a Labour victory and at least they would be able to do the basic job competently. I mistook boring for competence and sadly I was wrong.
It's still early days although the signs are not promising. Sticking to the Tories pretence that quality services can be provided without adequate taxation in the light of limited economic growth is a disingenuous lie.
Labour with their enormous majority had the opportunity to come clean. They remain fearful of upsetting the Daily Mail, perhaps unaware that the Daily Mail despise them not for their fiscal policy but just because they hate them because they can. They need to do what they need to do, and to Hell with the Daily Mail. Pandering to the Daily Mail will not redistribute a fairer society. "The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate" isn't a sustainable economic model.
The Conservative offering is equally disingenuous and Hunt cutting NI twice in anticipation of an election was unequivocal dereliction of duty. The Conservatives harp on at Labour being the "high tax party" despite their recent record on taxation. If anything their outright lie is even more appalling. "Only the Conservatives can cut taxes and improve services". The politics of the magic money tree is a very tempting offer.
Only Nigel offers a realistic option. Yes he will cut your taxes, but he will also decimate your public services. If for example reduced taxes means a reduced NHS funding package Reform can look to the insurance model. The same applies to education and the social safety net ( charities can resolve that issue- or the workhouse?). If that isn't what you want don't vote Reform, although they are at least adding the sums up.
Not Labour, not Conservative, possibly Reform.
Who is missing from that list? The Spectator has an article this week chiding the LibDems for their lack of seriousness in the week Ed Davey released a charity single.
The economic situation is dominated by Brexit (we voted to be poorer). and the credit crunch aftermath. There simply isnt the money there once was.
The Tories answer was to kick the can down the road by taking one off savings from running everything down. That approach has run its course with broken roads, defence and health. We are now in a state of reckoning. No money and poor infrastructure. Labour have a tough gig.
There was never the money to afford Brown’s spending decisions. We’ve been bedevilled with a massive structural deficit since then. Osborne made some progress but not enough and decisions he made resulted in an impoverishment of the public realm. Subsequent governments did nothing to change that.
Reeves had the opportunity to change that and blame the Tories. She fucked up. That is the source of my frustration with her.
She just spent more and didn’t raise enough taxes to pay for it. It’s the lack of ambition and the desire to reward her supporters that’s the problem.
On the parking thing - it needs regulating. Casino rightly described the parking companies as vultures - they exist to issue tickets and send threatening letters. Operating a car park is merely their entrapment scam.
I had a run-in with one of them a decade or so back. Parked in a leisure park on the edge of the town centre. Crossed the road at the edge of the park, went into one shop for 2 minutes then into the cinema on the park. Came back and found that I had been ticketed for "leaving the leisure park".
So I went round with a camera doing my research. There was a sign with their terms and conditions. Not on the access road I entered on, not in the car park I parked in, not on the (extended) footpath to the pedestrian crossing by the cinema which I briefly crossed. Off in the other corner where no-one could see it. Whats more there's no cameras at the pedestrian crossing owned by the leisure park (just traffic cams pointing at traffic on the crossing lights).
So how had I been seen breaking the rule that I hadn't contractually accepted? Then I spotted the gnome in his cabin. Genuinely sculking about following pedestrians. Their evidence was their employee following me to catch me leaving.
Lets just say that I had fun writing the successful appeal letter...
My favourite car park experience was getting a fine for parking in my father’s parking space in a car park he owned. A half hour argument on the phone with the company where I was trying to explain to them I had done nothing wrong and desperately trying not to pull the “my dad owns the fucking car park” card ensued. Ultimately I had to say “my dad owns the fucking car park” as they wouldn’t accept the fact that they had no reason to fine me anyway.
We had exactly the same experience with a car park in central Derby (since redeveloped); except they did it to the owner (who had an agreement for free use of the car park). IIRC he sent the fine letter back to them with a letter threatening termination of the contract to lease the land. They backed down...
My wife was got last week at a retail and leisure park. 5 hour free parking limit, which she didn’t know about but no doubt is written in small print on the notice boards.
2 hours at IKEA, then in to the cinema to watch a film with our daughter. All in all 5 hours 10 minutes. £45.
This sort of stuff really pisses people off. Yes, there will be people who egregiously break the rules and try to park for free. Yes, they may want people to leave as quickly as possible at busy times. But they're taking the piss going for people who overstay by a few minutes or make honest mistakes.
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Trouble is, if you’re the ruling party focusing on things like this you get the “cones hotline” jibes thrown at you.
Parking is a racket, run by rogue companies. I hope the Courts pull this bunch of cowboys up short, but I'm not hopeful.
ParkingEye Limited v Beavis in the Supreme Court…
I think this needs careful legislation. The courts can’t fix this because of freedom of contract
IANAL but I thought there was a general provision where a court could deem a contract fulfilled if the defaulting party had made reasonable efforts to do so.
The honesty we need to have is around cutting £60-100bn from current state spending and increasing investment by £30-50bn. That means drastic measures on welfare spending, tapering the state pension, drastically cutting back benefits for working and non-working households, ending the landlord subsidy and a selective default on unfunded defined benefit pension schemes in the public sector, by ca. 30-40% for both future and current beneficiaries.
It is the only way to bring the budget back into balance and have an investment boost for national infrastructure.
The idea that we can endlessly raise tax without any economic penalties or that bringing back tax and spend to fix state services is simply ridiculous. It has never worked and it will never work, we will just end up poorer as the state continues to destroy economic activity by funnelling productivity gains in the private sector down the public sector black hole. There isn't a single departmental budget that could be increased without a resulting decrease in productivity.
That's the honest truth, cut spending on welfare, increase spending on infrastructure and reform public spending on services by cutting 3 or 4 layers of middle management and administrative people who don't add anything to the customer experience but hugely detract from productivity.
We cannot afford more tax rises and we cannot afford more borrowing, both are at the limit cutting entitlements/welfare is the only option. Anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves and not being honest.
Lots more happening in Syria today. It seems there’s an offensive making significant ground in Idlib, and some action in Southern Syria too.
All I suspect a knock-on consequence of the weakening of Hezbollah since Israel started attacking.
George W Bush once spoke of an Axis of Evil after 9/11 of Iran, Iraq and North Korea but that was really odd because Iran and Iraq were enemies not allies. And North Korea is more of a hermit recluse than an ally of anyone.
Iran, Russia, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas etc are a real Axis of Evil that have supported each other in the past but the problem they have is they've all overstretched themselves now and are getting taken down pegs that mean they can't support each other.
Though like GWB originally suggested, now NK is getting involved helping Russia.
On the issue of parking fines I got a fixed penalty from a pair of traffic wardens in Wigan in about February. After we moved couldn't find a local dentist so have to drive to Wigan to see one.
Gone to take my daughter to a dentist appointment, all the spaces in front of the dentist are pay and display but were all occupied. Next to the spaces was a single yellow line so I checked the only visible signage to see what restrictions apply and it just says to pay and display so I did.
Got out of the dentist after her appointment and saw a parking fine stuck to the car. Also saw the traffic wardens just down the road so went to politely speak to then and said I'd paid and displayed.
The male warden was a dick who just said there's a single yellow line there so read the Highway Code (he should, it just means restrictions apply and those are normally on signage). I replied I'd checked the signage and it says pay and display and I had paid.
The female warden was much more polite, she replied apologetically to say that she had made a note on her system to say I had a valid paid for parking ticket displayed. She also explained that Wigan doesn't have signage for its single yellow lines (where I live they do) and said that she'd make a further note that I said I'd checked the signage and suggested I appeal.
Was busy and forgot to appeal in time, so thought I'd appeal when the inevitable fine came through the post. None ever did. That was nearly 10 months ago so not sure one ever will now. No idea if someone saw the notes and chose to cancel it, or if they're just less organised at chasing unpaid fines than the parasitical private firms.
Back in the 70s and 80s, there was an infamous traffic warden in Teignmouth who would do things like ticket a bride's car outside a church during a wedding and, even more infamously, a hearse during a funeral. That even got on national TV.
On the issue of parking fines I got a fixed penalty from a pair of traffic wardens in Wigan in about February. After we moved couldn't find a local dentist so have to drive to Wigan to see one.
Gone to take my daughter to a dentist appointment, all the spaces in front of the dentist are pay and display but were all occupied. Next to the spaces was a single yellow line so I checked the only visible signage to see what restrictions apply and it just says to pay and display so I did.
Got out of the dentist after her appointment and saw a parking fine stuck to the car. Also saw the traffic wardens just down the road so went to politely speak to then and said I'd paid and displayed.
The male warden was a dick who just said there's a single yellow line there so read the Highway Code (he should, it just means restrictions apply and those are normally on signage). I replied I'd checked the signage and it says pay and display and I had paid.
The female warden was much more polite, she replied apologetically to say that she had made a note on her system to say I had a valid paid for parking ticket displayed. She also explained that Wigan doesn't have signage for its single yellow lines (where I live they do) and said that she'd make a further note that I said I'd checked the signage and suggested I appeal.
Was busy and forgot to appeal in time, so thought I'd appeal when the inevitable fine came through the post. None ever did. That was nearly 10 months ago so not sure one ever will now. No idea if someone saw the notes and chose to cancel it, or if they're just less organised at chasing unpaid fines than the parasitical private firms.
One question leaps out. How did you find a dentist in Wigan?
On the parking thing - it needs regulating. Casino rightly described the parking companies as vultures - they exist to issue tickets and send threatening letters. Operating a car park is merely their entrapment scam.
I had a run-in with one of them a decade or so back. Parked in a leisure park on the edge of the town centre. Crossed the road at the edge of the park, went into one shop for 2 minutes then into the cinema on the park. Came back and found that I had been ticketed for "leaving the leisure park".
So I went round with a camera doing my research. There was a sign with their terms and conditions. Not on the access road I entered on, not in the car park I parked in, not on the (extended) footpath to the pedestrian crossing by the cinema which I briefly crossed. Off in the other corner where no-one could see it. Whats more there's no cameras at the pedestrian crossing owned by the leisure park (just traffic cams pointing at traffic on the crossing lights).
So how had I been seen breaking the rule that I hadn't contractually accepted? Then I spotted the gnome in his cabin. Genuinely sculking about following pedestrians. Their evidence was their employee following me to catch me leaving.
Lets just say that I had fun writing the successful appeal letter...
My favourite car park experience was getting a fine for parking in my father’s parking space in a car park he owned. A half hour argument on the phone with the company where I was trying to explain to them I had done nothing wrong and desperately trying not to pull the “my dad owns the fucking car park” card ensued. Ultimately I had to say “my dad owns the fucking car park” as they wouldn’t accept the fact that they had no reason to fine me anyway.
We had exactly the same experience with a car park in central Derby (since redeveloped); except they did it to the owner (who had an agreement for free use of the car park). IIRC he sent the fine letter back to them with a letter threatening termination of the contract to lease the land. They backed down...
My wife was got last week at a retail and leisure park. 5 hour free parking limit, which she didn’t know about but no doubt is written in small print on the notice boards.
2 hours at IKEA, then in to the cinema to watch a film with our daughter. All in all 5 hours 10 minutes. £45.
This sort of stuff really pisses people off. Yes, there will be people who egregiously break the rules and try to park for free. Yes, they may want people to leave as quickly as possible at busy times. But they're taking the piss going for people who overstay by a few minutes or make honest mistakes.
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Trouble is, if you’re the ruling party focusing on things like this you get the “cones hotline” jibes thrown at you.
Which is before my time but seems more of a myth than reality.
The Tories lost in 1997 as they were tired, divided, disliked and had no economic credibility. Not because of cones.
Had Blair done a cones thing in 1998 nobody would be talking about it still.
The honesty we need to have is around cutting £60-100bn from current state spending and increasing investment by £30-50bn. That means drastic measures on welfare spending, tapering the state pension, drastically cutting back benefits for working and non-working households, ending the landlord subsidy and a selective default on unfunded defined benefit pension schemes in the public sector, by ca. 30-40% for both future and current beneficiaries.
It is the only way to bring the budget back into balance and have an investment boost for national infrastructure.
The idea that we can endlessly raise tax without any economic penalties or that bringing back tax and spend to fix state services is simply ridiculous. It has never worked and it will never work, we will just end up poorer as the state continues to destroy economic activity by funnelling productivity gains in the private sector down the public sector black hole. There isn't a single departmental budget that could be increased without a resulting decrease in productivity.
That's the honest truth, cut spending on welfare, increase spending on infrastructure and reform public spending on services by cutting 3 or 4 layers of middle management and administrative people who don't add anything to the customer experience but hugely detract from productivity.
We cannot afford more tax rises and we cannot afford more borrowing, both are at the limit cutting entitlements/welfare is the only option. Anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves and not being honest.
You're right, the problem is there isn't a party campaigning to do that.
We had 14 years of Tory government that left office with a higher expenditure on welfare than Gordon Brown left office with.
On the issue of parking fines I got a fixed penalty from a pair of traffic wardens in Wigan in about February. After we moved couldn't find a local dentist so have to drive to Wigan to see one.
Gone to take my daughter to a dentist appointment, all the spaces in front of the dentist are pay and display but were all occupied. Next to the spaces was a single yellow line so I checked the only visible signage to see what restrictions apply and it just says to pay and display so I did.
Got out of the dentist after her appointment and saw a parking fine stuck to the car. Also saw the traffic wardens just down the road so went to politely speak to then and said I'd paid and displayed.
The male warden was a dick who just said there's a single yellow line there so read the Highway Code (he should, it just means restrictions apply and those are normally on signage). I replied I'd checked the signage and it says pay and display and I had paid.
The female warden was much more polite, she replied apologetically to say that she had made a note on her system to say I had a valid paid for parking ticket displayed. She also explained that Wigan doesn't have signage for its single yellow lines (where I live they do) and said that she'd make a further note that I said I'd checked the signage and suggested I appeal.
Was busy and forgot to appeal in time, so thought I'd appeal when the inevitable fine came through the post. None ever did. That was nearly 10 months ago so not sure one ever will now. No idea if someone saw the notes and chose to cancel it, or if they're just less organised at chasing unpaid fines than the parasitical private firms.
So, tell us, what does @malcolmg look like in real life?
Probably a fair summary from MoonRabbit. But for me the issue has not just been Labour failing to provide a balanced budget. It has been the fact that, after promising to be a clean slate, honest with the public, honest in their own dealings and at least mildly competent, they have turned out, to a large extent, to be no better than the last lot.
They follow the same old tired, dishonest matra about everything being disastrously bad, exaggerating the black hole (as an example) and making stupid, unforced errors. They show themselves to be completely out of touch with reality when it comes to large sections of the economy and people's real lives and at the same time continue the indefensible practice of sucking up to the multinationals and the rich and powerful.
I said before the election that, although I would not vote for them, I didn't fear a Labour victory and at least they would be able to do the basic job competently. I mistook boring for competence and sadly I was wrong.
It's still early days although the signs are not promising. Sticking to the Tories pretence that quality services can be provided without adequate taxation in the light of limited economic growth is a disingenuous lie.
Labour with their enormous majority had the opportunity to come clean. They remain fearful of upsetting the Daily Mail, perhaps unaware that the Daily Mail despise them not for their fiscal policy but just because they hate them because they can. They need to do what they need to do, and to Hell with the Daily Mail. Pandering to the Daily Mail will not redistribute a fairer society. "The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate" isn't a sustainable economic model.
The Conservative offering is equally disingenuous and Hunt cutting NI twice in anticipation of an election was unequivocal dereliction of duty. The Conservatives harp on at Labour being the "high tax party" despite their recent record on taxation. If anything their outright lie is even more appalling. "Only the Conservatives can cut taxes and improve services". The politics of the magic money tree is a very tempting offer.
Only Nigel offers a realistic option. Yes he will cut your taxes, but he will also decimate your public services. If for example reduced taxes means a reduced NHS funding package Reform can look to the insurance model. The same applies to education and the social safety net ( charities can resolve that issue- or the workhouse?). If that isn't what you want don't vote Reform, although they are at least adding the sums up.
Not Labour, not Conservative, possibly Reform.
Who is missing from that list? The Spectator has an article this week chiding the LibDems for their lack of seriousness in the week Ed Davey released a charity single.
Parking is a racket, run by rogue companies. I hope the Courts pull this bunch of cowboys up short, but I'm not hopeful.
The five minute rule is ridiculous. It would take that long just to read all the terms and conditions.
If indeed you can find them, they are printed clearly and the light is adequate.
Camden Council run a highly profitable parking racket in which the rules are deliberately constructed to catch out the inexperienced and unwary. For example, they break up the area into Zones, with different rules for each Zone. You may very well find yourself studying the rules on the notice opposite the space where you have parked only to learn later that you were in a different Zone, the rules for which were shown on a notice fifty yards away and round the corner.
Kingsbury Station has no area for dropping off and picking up passengers. You could spend all day reading the lengthy rules displayed by the entrance and not discover what you are supposed to do. The technically correct answer is that you must find an empty parking space and pay for a day's parking. Regular users know that if you are quick you can get in and out without punishment, but you are taking a chance. Some prefer to park on the double yellow lines by the entrance and sit in the car with the engine running, but this creates difficulties and dangers for others. It's a system that the Car Park Company has created in order to encourage infractions which it can then penalise.
I find this a very common approach with Private Companies, less so with Public Authorities (Camden Council notwithstanding.)
Glasgow City Council's favourite one is to have the exits from car parks leading into bus lanes. So people who don't drive out immediately into a non-bus lane get fined, even if it is night-time and the buses aren't running.
The honesty we need to have is around cutting £60-100bn from current state spending and increasing investment by £30-50bn. That means drastic measures on welfare spending, tapering the state pension, drastically cutting back benefits for working and non-working households, ending the landlord subsidy and a selective default on unfunded defined benefit pension schemes in the public sector, by ca. 30-40% for both future and current beneficiaries.
It is the only way to bring the budget back into balance and have an investment boost for national infrastructure.
The idea that we can endlessly raise tax without any economic penalties or that bringing back tax and spend to fix state services is simply ridiculous. It has never worked and it will never work, we will just end up poorer as the state continues to destroy economic activity by funnelling productivity gains in the private sector down the public sector black hole. There isn't a single departmental budget that could be increased without a resulting decrease in productivity.
That's the honest truth, cut spending on welfare, increase spending on infrastructure and reform public spending on services by cutting 3 or 4 layers of middle management and administrative people who don't add anything to the customer experience but hugely detract from productivity.
We cannot afford more tax rises and we cannot afford more borrowing, both are at the limit cutting entitlements/welfare is the only option. Anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves and not being honest.
You won't get people to call for a smaller state, as long as our grandchildren are subsidising the current size of the state. We need higher taxes to balance the books.
"The YouTuber Charlie Anderson’s most popular video, Unlock the secret steps for winning your Pip claims, had 378,000 views and offered advice for people seeking personal independence payments, which are meant to provide extra support for difficulties caused by physical or mental health conditions and disabilities.
In the video, she said: “I have a 100 per cent success rate at winning Pip claims for people because of understanding the point system and how to communicate it in a manner that then scores the points.”
She also posted templates for claims on her website as well as reviews for chargeable services of up to £950 for a personal session."
Um. So she's working then.
Funnily enough, this is largely the PIP service that Citizens Advice offers (help with making claims) though we don't charge a penny of course and we certainly don't claim 100% success, which is plainly impossible.
I quite often advise clients not to claim as they really don't meet the criteria. Also, to say the DWP assessments are usually quite rigorous.
Government should pass a law making it illegal to charge for benefits advice maybe? I dunno, more red tape.
Also, very odd to see right-wingers condemn free enterprise.
Twice: Sickness benefits advice service and parking companies!
Because right wings don’t believe in unregulated capitalism - you are creating a strawman
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Two unfunded and unnecessary employee NI cuts from Hunt salted the earth.
Labour fell hook line and sinker in to the political trap by committing so quickly to honour both.
It will define the first 2 budgets at least probably 3.Even refusing to honour the second or just going back on it on 6 July would have given headway.
Aside from a clearly managed and hostile right wing and tv media, they are producing shed loads of promising policy aims. Delivery within 3 years will be key.
Tories have managed to appoint a Leader worse than any of the last 3 by all measures and that will give Starmer breathing space.
Lib Dems are toothless in that 3rd Party slot that HoC set up disadvantages.
Reform get unprecedented air time from their in house pripofanda station but as time goes by the bulk of the electorate will come to realise there is
Trumps puppet Two multi millionaire Businessmen Swop a Party for a fee Lee and Andrea A convicted partner basher and very little else other than funding from Musk, Bannon and Putin.
The 2029 election will be defined in economy, migration and cost of living data in January 2028...no sooner probably not later.
Yes Hunt salted the earth with the NI cuts but Labour agreed not to repeal them. Labour are implying they were affordable, they are not. Reeves has been a disaster, her budget tinkered around the edges. If Labour didn't have the cajones to be brutally honest and brutally painful about the tax and spend dilemma ( if you want universal public services taxation needs to correlate) no one else will either.
Perhaps we need Nigel to take social policy back to the 1930s to learn that "cost of service" and "value of service" are not necessarily inclusive ideas.
Again with this lie over the NI cuts.
The NI cuts were part of a package of tax rises, not "salting the earth".
Labour should repeat them. Extend the threshold freeze but cut NI so that taxes are raised overall but earned incomes are protected and unearned incomes are the ones hit.
Repeat that until NI is abolished.
Taxes go up net but the imbalance between earned and unearned incomes is eliminated.
But Bart, NI cuts were not replaced by an income tax rise. It was simply an unaffordable con-trick tax cut. I agree that NI and income tax should be merged. There is little chance of that under Reeves, she would panic that GB News and the Telegraph would only report the income tax rise and not the NI cut.
You are wrong, they were replaced with a tax rise.
The freeze on tax thresholds was extended, that IS a tax rise. On both income tax and NI. With the NI cut being fully funded by that tax rise so earned incomes are protected while unearned ones pay the tax rise but get no benefit from the cut.
Reeves could repeat that if she chose. No rise in the rate of tax necessary.
It wasn't a like for like equalisation. It was smoke and mirrors. Hunt could have keep the combined NI and income tax figure around circa 30%, so no extra cost for the exchequer and an uptick with general taxation applied to those previously exempt of NI.
Local Jihadists who may or may not have gone more secular and mainstream over time. So, unsavoury and not the sort of chaps you’d want living next door, but not ISIS and not Assad. Sort of provisional IRA vibes.
If they’re successful I’d expect a period of factional in-fighting to follow.
It’s notable that they’ve had substantial military support from Turkey during this offensive. Next few weeks will be interesting.
Probably a fair summary from MoonRabbit. But for me the issue has not just been Labour failing to provide a balanced budget. It has been the fact that, after promising to be a clean slate, honest with the public, honest in their own dealings and at least mildly competent, they have turned out, to a large extent, to be no better than the last lot.
They follow the same old tired, dishonest matra about everything being disastrously bad, exaggerating the black hole (as an example) and making stupid, unforced errors. They show themselves to be completely out of touch with reality when it comes to large sections of the economy and people's real lives and at the same time continue the indefensible practice of sucking up to the multinationals and the rich and powerful.
I said before the election that, although I would not vote for them, I didn't fear a Labour victory and at least they would be able to do the basic job competently. I mistook boring for competence and sadly I was wrong.
It's still early days although the signs are not promising. Sticking to the Tories pretence that quality services can be provided without adequate taxation in the light of limited economic growth is a disingenuous lie.
Labour with their enormous majority had the opportunity to come clean. They remain fearful of upsetting the Daily Mail, perhaps unaware that the Daily Mail despise them not for their fiscal policy but just because they hate them because they can. They need to do what they need to do, and to Hell with the Daily Mail. Pandering to the Daily Mail will not redistribute a fairer society. "The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate" isn't a sustainable economic model.
The Conservative offering is equally disingenuous and Hunt cutting NI twice in anticipation of an election was unequivocal dereliction of duty. The Conservatives harp on at Labour being the "high tax party" despite their recent record on taxation. If anything their outright lie is even more appalling. "Only the Conservatives can cut taxes and improve services". The politics of the magic money tree is a very tempting offer.
Only Nigel offers a realistic option. Yes he will cut your taxes, but he will also decimate your public services. If for example reduced taxes means a reduced NHS funding package Reform can look to the insurance model. The same applies to education and the social safety net ( charities can resolve that issue- or the workhouse?). If that isn't what you want don't vote Reform, although they are at least adding the sums up.
Not Labour, not Conservative, possibly Reform.
Who is missing from that list? The Spectator has an article this week chiding the LibDems for their lack of seriousness in the week Ed Davey released a charity single.
Parking is a racket, run by rogue companies. I hope the Courts pull this bunch of cowboys up short, but I'm not hopeful.
The five minute rule is ridiculous. It would take that long just to read all the terms and conditions.
If indeed you can find them, they are printed clearly and the light is adequate.
Camden Council run a highly profitable parking racket in which the rules are deliberately constructed to catch out the inexperienced and unwary. For example, they break up the area into Zones, with different rules for each Zone. You may very well find yourself studying the rules on the notice opposite the space where you have parked only to learn later that you were in a different Zone, the rules for which were shown on a notice fifty yards away and round the corner.
Kingsbury Station has no area for dropping off and picking up passengers. You could spend all day reading the lengthy rules displayed by the entrance and not discover what you are supposed to do. The technically correct answer is that you must find an empty parking space and pay for a day's parking. Regular users know that if you are quick you can get in and out without punishment, but you are taking a chance. Some prefer to park on the double yellow lines by the entrance and sit in the car with the engine running, but this creates difficulties and dangers for others. It's a system that the Car Park Company has created in order to encourage infractions which it can then penalise.
I find this a very common approach with Private Companies, less so with Public Authorities (Camden Council notwithstanding.)
Glasgow City Council's favourite one is to have the exits from car parks leading into bus lanes. So people who don't drive out immediately into a non-bus lane get fined, even if it is night-time and the buses aren't running.
@eek dunno if I’m misremembering but wasn’t there something similar in John Dobson street with the car park there.
Two unfunded and unnecessary employee NI cuts from Hunt salted the earth.
Labour fell hook line and sinker in to the political trap by committing so quickly to honour both.
It will define the first 2 budgets at least probably 3.Even refusing to honour the second or just going back on it on 6 July would have given headway.
Aside from a clearly managed and hostile right wing and tv media, they are producing shed loads of promising policy aims. Delivery within 3 years will be key.
Tories have managed to appoint a Leader worse than any of the last 3 by all measures and that will give Starmer breathing space.
Lib Dems are toothless in that 3rd Party slot that HoC set up disadvantages.
Reform get unprecedented air time from their in house pripofanda station but as time goes by the bulk of the electorate will come to realise there is
Trumps puppet Two multi millionaire Businessmen Swop a Party for a fee Lee and Andrea A convicted partner basher and very little else other than funding from Musk, Bannon and Putin.
The 2029 election will be defined in economy, migration and cost of living data in January 2028...no sooner probably not later.
Yes Hunt salted the earth with the NI cuts but Labour agreed not to repeal them. Labour are implying they were affordable, they are not. Reeves has been a disaster, her budget tinkered around the edges. If Labour didn't have the cajones to be brutally honest and brutally painful about the tax and spend dilemma ( if you want universal public services taxation needs to correlate) no one else will either.
Perhaps we need Nigel to take social policy back to the 1930s to learn that "cost of service" and "value of service" are not necessarily inclusive ideas.
Again with this lie over the NI cuts.
The NI cuts were part of a package of tax rises, not "salting the earth".
Labour should repeat them. Extend the threshold freeze but cut NI so that taxes are raised overall but earned incomes are protected and unearned incomes are the ones hit.
Repeat that until NI is abolished.
Taxes go up net but the imbalance between earned and unearned incomes is eliminated.
But Bart, NI cuts were not replaced by an income tax rise. It was simply an unaffordable con-trick tax cut. I agree that NI and income tax should be merged. There is little chance of that under Reeves, she would panic that GB News and the Telegraph would only report the income tax rise and not the NI cut.
You are wrong, they were replaced with a tax rise.
The freeze on tax thresholds was extended, that IS a tax rise. On both income tax and NI. With the NI cut being fully funded by that tax rise so earned incomes are protected while unearned ones pay the tax rise but get no benefit from the cut.
Reeves could repeat that if she chose. No rise in the rate of tax necessary.
It wasn't a like for like equalisation. It was smoke and mirrors. Hunt could have keep the combined NI and income tax figure around circa 30%, so no extra cost for the exchequer and an uptick with general taxation applied to those previously exempt of NI.
NI is a very cumbersome tax.
You're right he could have but he didn't. But either way it wasn't salting the earth, it was taking with one hand and giving with the other . . . with the net effect being a tax rise.
That's the polar opposite of salting the earth.
In no way, shape or form is a net tax rise an unfunded tax cut.
Parking is a racket, run by rogue companies. I hope the Courts pull this bunch of cowboys up short, but I'm not hopeful.
The five minute rule is ridiculous. It would take that long just to read all the terms and conditions.
If indeed you can find them, they are printed clearly and the light is adequate.
Camden Council run a highly profitable parking racket in which the rules are deliberately constructed to catch out the inexperienced and unwary. For example, they break up the area into Zones, with different rules for each Zone. You may very well find yourself studying the rules on the notice opposite the space where you have parked only to learn later that you were in a different Zone, the rules for which were shown on a notice fifty yards away and round the corner.
Kingsbury Station has no area for dropping off and picking up passengers. You could spend all day reading the lengthy rules displayed by the entrance and not discover what you are supposed to do. The technically correct answer is that you must find an empty parking space and pay for a day's parking. Regular users know that if you are quick you can get in and out without punishment, but you are taking a chance. Some prefer to park on the double yellow lines by the entrance and sit in the car with the engine running, but this creates difficulties and dangers for others. It's a system that the Car Park Company has created in order to encourage infractions which it can then penalise.
I find this a very common approach with Private Companies, less so with Public Authorities (Camden Council notwithstanding.)
Sitting with the engine idling unnecessarily is an offence under RTA 1988 S42 (that is Construction and Use Regulations, and rule 123 of the Highway Code.
(He said helpfully.)
But AIUI drop off and pick up is OK unless something on the location says not, even when No Loading / Waiting yellow kerb ticks are present.
(Yes, I did have to look it up. It's one of the more minor things I worry about.
eg the VIA ie official County contractor van, parked up yesterday lunchtime half-blocking the entrance pinch point to a traffic island, outside a busy chip shop with many coming and going, across the pedestrian crossing drop kerb so blocking wheelchairs, obscuring visibility of pedestrians crossing, half on the pavement so blocking *that* as well, whilst three of them took a single bag of asphalt out of the van to do a pothole, is rather more of a concern.)
Local Jihadists who may or may not have gone more secular and mainstream over time. So, unsavoury and not the sort of chaps you’d want living next door, but not ISIS and not Assad. Sort of provisional IRA vibes.
If they’re successful I’d expect a period of factional in-fighting to follow.
It’s notable that they’ve had substantial military support from Turkey during this offensive. Next few weeks will be interesting.
There's a question as to how much this is an attempt to gain lots of territory, and how much it is one to do a smash-and-grab unsettling movement, and see what they can keep. A bit like a combo between Hamas on October 6th and Ukraine's Kursk offensive.
Local Jihadists who may or may not have gone more secular and mainstream over time. So, unsavoury and not the sort of chaps you’d want living next door, but not ISIS and not Assad. Sort of provisional IRA vibes.
If they’re successful I’d expect a period of factional in-fighting to follow.
It’s notable that they’ve had substantial military support from Turkey during this offensive. Next few weeks will be interesting.
There's a question as to how much this is an attempt to gain lots of territory, and how much it is one to do a smash-and-grab unsettling movement, and see what they can keep. A bit like a combo between Hamas on October 6th and Ukraine's Kursk offensive.
It looks like a localised smash and grab that was way more successful than expected and has now snowballed. Assad being in Russia helps them I think.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
Do you really want to pollute the East Mids with that mob?
I think that fairly significant intervention on this may well be an upside with little downside for then Govt.
There are certain obvious nonsenses, such as enforcement being almost impossible especially on my own drive, but also on private land, without a civil action. If I park my car on IDS's drive whilst having a day in London, there's very little he can do about it.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
Do you really want to pollute the East Mids with that mob?
We should do a Canberra and build a new city to house Parliament in.
I think that fairly significant intervention on this may well be an upside with little downside for then Govt.
There are certain obvious nonsenses, such as enforcement being almost impossible especially on my own drive, but also on private land, without a civil action. If I park my car on IDS's drive whilst having a day in London, there's very little he can do about it.
There have been a few instances of people having had cars left on their drive and Plod cannot do a thing.
He can move it off as long as he does not damage it as that would be criminal damage.
Mind you In the days of rogue clampers towing cars any damage reported by car owners from the extorters taking their car was merely dismissed as being ‘there when we took it’ and Plod couldn’t do a thing.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
On the parking thing - it needs regulating. Casino rightly described the parking companies as vultures - they exist to issue tickets and send threatening letters. Operating a car park is merely their entrapment scam.
I had a run-in with one of them a decade or so back. Parked in a leisure park on the edge of the town centre. Crossed the road at the edge of the park, went into one shop for 2 minutes then into the cinema on the park. Came back and found that I had been ticketed for "leaving the leisure park".
So I went round with a camera doing my research. There was a sign with their terms and conditions. Not on the access road I entered on, not in the car park I parked in, not on the (extended) footpath to the pedestrian crossing by the cinema which I briefly crossed. Off in the other corner where no-one could see it. Whats more there's no cameras at the pedestrian crossing owned by the leisure park (just traffic cams pointing at traffic on the crossing lights).
So how had I been seen breaking the rule that I hadn't contractually accepted? Then I spotted the gnome in his cabin. Genuinely sculking about following pedestrians. Their evidence was their employee following me to catch me leaving.
Lets just say that I had fun writing the successful appeal letter...
My favourite car park experience was getting a fine for parking in my father’s parking space in a car park he owned. A half hour argument on the phone with the company where I was trying to explain to them I had done nothing wrong and desperately trying not to pull the “my dad owns the fucking car park” card ensued. Ultimately I had to say “my dad owns the fucking car park” as they wouldn’t accept the fact that they had no reason to fine me anyway.
We had exactly the same experience with a car park in central Derby (since redeveloped); except they did it to the owner (who had an agreement for free use of the car park). IIRC he sent the fine letter back to them with a letter threatening termination of the contract to lease the land. They backed down...
My wife was got last week at a retail and leisure park. 5 hour free parking limit, which she didn’t know about but no doubt is written in small print on the notice boards.
2 hours at IKEA, then in to the cinema to watch a film with our daughter. All in all 5 hours 10 minutes. £45.
This sort of stuff really pisses people off. Yes, there will be people who egregiously break the rules and try to park for free. Yes, they may want people to leave as quickly as possible at busy times. But they're taking the piss going for people who overstay by a few minutes or make honest mistakes.
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Trouble is, if you’re the ruling party focusing on things like this you get the “cones hotline” jibes thrown at you.
Which is before my time but seems more of a myth than reality.
The Tories lost in 1997 as they were tired, divided, disliked and had no economic credibility. Not because of cones.
Had Blair done a cones thing in 1998 nobody would be talking about it still.
That was the point. The Cones Hotline was not hated, it was derided. After more than a decade in power, the best Major could come up with was a gimmick like the Cones Hotline. Great if Labour had done it in 1998 or any new – repeat new – government had it as a minor part of its policy package. If you want a comparison, remember the sense of disappointment, pre-GFC, when it dawned on the nation that popular new Prime Minister Gordon Brown had no inspirational new programme.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Very early days but my initial thought is not how much will change but how little.
I suspect FF and FG probably do have just about enough votes to carry on.
The news from the tallies is that there are more transfers between FF and FG - voters increasingly treating them as one party - which might mean their position is a bit stronger than the first preference vote decline would imply, and they may win a few more of the last seats in constituencies ahead of the smaller parties.
News from Louth is that Fine Gael's McGahon is trailing the other FG candidate, a neat demonstration of how the STV voting system gives voters a chance to vote for their party, but against a candidate caught on video involved in a serious case of fisticuffs.
The honesty we need to have is around cutting £60-100bn from current state spending and increasing investment by £30-50bn. That means drastic measures on welfare spending, tapering the state pension, drastically cutting back benefits for working and non-working households, ending the landlord subsidy and a selective default on unfunded defined benefit pension schemes in the public sector, by ca. 30-40% for both future and current beneficiaries.
It is the only way to bring the budget back into balance and have an investment boost for national infrastructure.
The idea that we can endlessly raise tax without any economic penalties or that bringing back tax and spend to fix state services is simply ridiculous. It has never worked and it will never work, we will just end up poorer as the state continues to destroy economic activity by funnelling productivity gains in the private sector down the public sector black hole. There isn't a single departmental budget that could be increased without a resulting decrease in productivity.
That's the honest truth, cut spending on welfare, increase spending on infrastructure and reform public spending on services by cutting 3 or 4 layers of middle management and administrative people who don't add anything to the customer experience but hugely detract from productivity.
We cannot afford more tax rises and we cannot afford more borrowing, both are at the limit cutting entitlements/welfare is the only option. Anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves and not being honest.
You're right, the problem is there isn't a party campaigning to do that.
We had 14 years of Tory government that left office with a higher expenditure on welfare than Gordon Brown left office with.
WTAF.
Even worse, people think they've suffered 'austerity' while that has been happening.
Louise Haigh was convicted of fraud after a mobile phone that she reported to police as stolen was used to call one of her relatives, The Times has been told.
Haigh resigned as transport secretary on Thursday night after confirming that she had pleaded guilty after a police investigation involving stolen and missing phones in 2014.
Sources close to Haigh said that she reported the matter “in full” to Sir Keir Starmer when she joined the shadow cabinet in 2020.
However, Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff, advised her to resign when No 10 became concerned that Haigh had not revealed all the details of the conviction after a report in The Times....
...Haigh said in a statement that she was mugged during a night out in 2013. “I was a young woman and the experience was terrifying,” she said. She was said to have reported the incident to police three or four days later and had told them a man put his arm around her outside a pub, slipped off her handbag and ran off.
She gave police a list of items that she said were in her handbag, including her company phone that was supplied by her employer Aviva.
Haigh said she subsequently found the mobile phone in a drawer in her house and made a mistake by failing to inform Aviva straight away.
The Times has been told that Aviva began a formal investigation into Haigh after establishing that the stolen mobile phone was being used to call her existing contacts, including one of her relatives.
Investigations by police confirmed that the same numbers had been called by the phone before and after the report of the theft. Haigh did not respond to questions about the use of the phone when approached for comment.
A case file was sent to the Crown Prosecution Service and she was charged with fraud by false representation. Haigh pleaded guilty when she appeared at Camberwell Green magistrates court in November 2014.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
I heard this years ago from a rich American woman on a kenyan safari. She was old but very sharp - witty. She was also Trump’s next door neighbour and knew him very well
Everyone in the safari was dissing Trump and she stayed quiet. Then she told me as an aside that she knew him very well and “he’s funny and very clever”
On the parking thing - it needs regulating. Casino rightly described the parking companies as vultures - they exist to issue tickets and send threatening letters. Operating a car park is merely their entrapment scam.
I had a run-in with one of them a decade or so back. Parked in a leisure park on the edge of the town centre. Crossed the road at the edge of the park, went into one shop for 2 minutes then into the cinema on the park. Came back and found that I had been ticketed for "leaving the leisure park".
So I went round with a camera doing my research. There was a sign with their terms and conditions. Not on the access road I entered on, not in the car park I parked in, not on the (extended) footpath to the pedestrian crossing by the cinema which I briefly crossed. Off in the other corner where no-one could see it. Whats more there's no cameras at the pedestrian crossing owned by the leisure park (just traffic cams pointing at traffic on the crossing lights).
So how had I been seen breaking the rule that I hadn't contractually accepted? Then I spotted the gnome in his cabin. Genuinely sculking about following pedestrians. Their evidence was their employee following me to catch me leaving.
Lets just say that I had fun writing the successful appeal letter...
My favourite car park experience was getting a fine for parking in my father’s parking space in a car park he owned. A half hour argument on the phone with the company where I was trying to explain to them I had done nothing wrong and desperately trying not to pull the “my dad owns the fucking car park” card ensued. Ultimately I had to say “my dad owns the fucking car park” as they wouldn’t accept the fact that they had no reason to fine me anyway.
We had exactly the same experience with a car park in central Derby (since redeveloped); except they did it to the owner (who had an agreement for free use of the car park). IIRC he sent the fine letter back to them with a letter threatening termination of the contract to lease the land. They backed down...
My wife was got last week at a retail and leisure park. 5 hour free parking limit, which she didn’t know about but no doubt is written in small print on the notice boards.
2 hours at IKEA, then in to the cinema to watch a film with our daughter. All in all 5 hours 10 minutes. £45.
This sort of stuff really pisses people off. Yes, there will be people who egregiously break the rules and try to park for free. Yes, they may want people to leave as quickly as possible at busy times. But they're taking the piss going for people who overstay by a few minutes or make honest mistakes.
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Things are at least not as bad as they were, before the coalition government banned car clamping on private land.
I got involved in this issue many years ago as a councillor, when there was a piece of vacant land, just large enough to park a car, on a corner just off Wanstead High Street.
Because the high street was usually parked up, people often used to chance parking there to run round the corner for a pint of milk - sadly for them, a bunch of complete cowboys - ironically posing as “Elite Parking Management” - had persuaded the owner to allow them to ‘manage’ parking on the plot, and they’d erected a small notice explaining that private clamping was in operation. Two guys used to sit all day in a van across the road, and the instant someone parked up and went round the corner for their milk, they’d leap out and clamp the car. The driver would return minutes later to find two threatening guys demanding £150 to release it. Some of the incidents when people had tried to argue back came close to violence.
As a councillor I was able to give the issue some publicity, through local media and my own literature, which at least alerted locals as to the danger. And I spent a Saturday afternoon warning off people from parking there, which annoyed the parking muggers hugely, and was a handy publicity stunt. But, happily, the coalition government was looking at the issue at that time, and I was able to liaise with the LibDem junior minister as the ban, eventually enacted within the Protection of Freedoms Act in 2012, made its way through parliament.
Green Party could be wiped out they're now saying - just as the last time they went into government with FF.
Their problem is that they don't drive a hard enough bargain, and their coalition partners end up claiming the credit for the things the Green party force them to do.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
Why is he such a charmless tosser in public then?
Probably wanting to corner the market in support from charmless tossers. Which tbf he seems to have achieved.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
And, of course, Westminster and Whitehall are themselves former Royal Palaces, so it follows tradition for Parliament to use royal castoffs.
Why hasn’t the unfair contract terms stuff snookered all of this car park nonsense? I had assumed that was still merrily making its way through every sector of the economy, skewering those who rely on “contacts” that can’t be seen or don’t get read.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Move Parliament online and have them work from their constituencies. Massive savings.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
Low grade Google research informs me that the U.K. benefits budgets exceeds the income tax take. That doesn’t feel sustainable and is a remarkable inheritance from the Conservatives. Again a difficult task for this government on top of everything, which they seem willing to tackle. No wonder they look glum. It’s a nigh on impossible job.
Hopefully my Googling is incorrect.
Strange comparison to make tbh. (Plus I don't think it's right if you exclude State Pension from welfare.)
Would you be happier if Income Tax was lower but VAT say 25%? Or Income tax abolished but everybody's wealth taxed at 2% pa?
Four big drivers of the high benefit bill imo are: 1. Housing costs - claimant's get their rent costs largely covered. Reduce rents = reduce benefits. 2. Low pay - most UC claimants are working. 3. Poor mental health care - most disability claims are not mental health related. 4. Illegal drugs - recreational drugs need legalising, regulating, taxing.
In general LHA is so far below rent costs in the PRS that even significantly reduced rents would hardly impact.
LHA are linked to the 30th market percentile for the type of dwelling (ie One bedroom for a couple, Two bedrooms for a couple with 2 children under 10 etc), and have always been subject to the bedroom tax, and are only reassessed every 3-5 years so are always at 20th percentile market level then reduced by 2-3 years of inflation.
But you are playing an old tune.
Housing benefit spending has fallen by about 60% in real terms since 2009. My photo quota. This is the total amount.
The latest figures I have seen, which are several years old, have roughly 2/3 of that reduced number going to the social sector not the PRS. I suspect that that is driven by ~20 years of faster rent rises in the social sector over the PRS.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
77,000 m² vs 112,000 m² according to Google, so not that different in terms of space - but, yeah, I'd suggest housing only the debating chambers and perhaps some of the committee rooms in the palace building itself. Temporary offices in the garden would be the way to go - there should be more than enough space in the lawn area, so you wouldn't be needing to cut down any trees etc.
Interesting article. Labour it seems has protected working people but only if they work in the public sector mainly, everyone else got hit in the Budget
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
Why is he such a charmless tosser in public then?
Such a charmless tosser he has won the presidency. Twice
Interesting article. Labour it seems has protected working people but only if they work in the public sector mainly, everyone else got hit in the Budget
That's a bit of a lazy Tory cliche.
What else do you expect from the only Tory in the village?
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
I suppose people with age related dementia have good and bad days.. My mother in law was like that. One day unusually civil, most days the joyless, impish fun vacuum she had perfected throughout her life.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
77,000 m² vs 112,000 m² according to Google, so not that different in terms of space - but, yeah, I'd suggest housing only the debating chambers and perhaps some of the committee rooms in the palace building itself. Temporary offices in the garden would be the way to go - there should be more than enough space in the lawn area, so you wouldn't be needing to cut down any trees etc.
Most of that space is either wide corridors, or small rooms. The ball room would work as a chamber, but there probably isn't another room big enough to work as a second one.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
Why is he such a charmless tosser in public then?
Such a charmless tosser he has won the presidency. Twice
He's not the sort I'd share a curry with though. I think that's my measure of choice.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
Footprint of Buckingham Palace is 77,000 square metres and 800 rooms
Footprint of Palace of Westminster is 112,000 square metres and 1100 rooms.
They'd have to utch up a bit, but they also have Portcullis House and could put Portakabins in the palace garden.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
You need Waze (set to not reveal your use to other users, since it’s illegal in France)
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
Footprint of Buckingham Palace is 77,000 square metres and 800 rooms
Footprint of Palace of Westminster is 112,000 square metres and 1100 rooms.
They'd have to utch up a bit, but they also have Portcullis House and could put Portakabins in the palace garden.
I'd question if there are actually 800 legitimate rooms.
If there are you'd be including mezzanine floors which have incredibly low ceilings and are not fit to have people working in them.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
This morning I received my first speeding fine in 20 years for doing 24 mph in a 20 mph zone in Kew at 10:20 on a Sunday morning. I'm normally careful. I just can't remember this event. I'll just pay up or agree to be re-educated.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
As a pedant I feel compelled to note that no civil servants work in Parliament. However, under the House of Commons Administration Act 1978 their terms and conditions of service of staff must be kept 'broadly in line' with the Home Civil Service.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
As a pedant I feel compelled to note that no civil servants work in Parliament. However, under the House of Commons Administration Act 1978 their terms and conditions of service of staff must be kept 'broadly in line' with the Home Civil Service.
Idea
Relocate Parliament and hangers on to a tent city in an empty field in the middle of nowhere.
They can build what they want - buildings, roads, railways. From scratch. And if they want to hold planning enquiries for a decade about it, fine.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
You need Waze (set to not reveal your use to other users, since it’s illegal in France)
Merci!
I've just looked into this and it might explain why I keep infringing (when I really am quite careful). Often French roads do not have speed limit signage, you are expected to "know"
Low grade Google research informs me that the U.K. benefits budgets exceeds the income tax take. That doesn’t feel sustainable and is a remarkable inheritance from the Conservatives. Again a difficult task for this government on top of everything, which they seem willing to tackle. No wonder they look glum. It’s a nigh on impossible job.
Hopefully my Googling is incorrect.
Strange comparison to make tbh. (Plus I don't think it's right if you exclude State Pension from welfare.)
Would you be happier if Income Tax was lower but VAT say 25%? Or Income tax abolished but everybody's wealth taxed at 2% pa?
Four big drivers of the high benefit bill imo are: 1. Housing costs - claimant's get their rent costs largely covered. Reduce rents = reduce benefits. 2. Low pay - most UC claimants are working. 3. Poor mental health care - most disability claims are not mental health related. 4. Illegal drugs - recreational drugs need legalising, regulating, taxing.
In general LHA is so far below rent costs in the PRS that even significantly reduced rents would hardly impact.
LHA are linked to the 30th market percentile for the type of dwelling (ie One bedroom for a couple, Two bedrooms for a couple with 2 children under 10 etc), and have always been subject to the bedroom tax, and are only reassessed every 3-5 years so are always at 20th percentile market level then reduced by 2-3 years of inflation.
But you are playing an old tune.
Housing benefit spending has fallen by about 60% in real terms since 2009. My photo quota. This is the total amount.
The latest figures I have seen, which are several years old, have roughly 2/3 of that reduced number going to the social sector not the PRS. I suspect that that is driven by ~20 years of faster rent rises in the social sector over the PRS.
And, of course, the benefits cap means that very few people of working age are actually able to get the full LHA amount anyway in London (and presumably much of the South-East as well).
The only part of the bill for housing subsidies that's growing is for pensioners (they're not affected by the benefits cap, and can access Housing Benefit which is less onerous than the housing component of UC).
It's hard not to conclude that we've tilted the system too far in favour of pensioners. At the very least, the triple lock needs to be scrapped before we can even think about further erosion of the safety net for people of working age.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
Footprint of Buckingham Palace is 77,000 square metres and 800 rooms
Footprint of Palace of Westminster is 112,000 square metres and 1100 rooms.
They'd have to utch up a bit, but they also have Portcullis House and could put Portakabins in the palace garden.
I'd question if there are actually 800 legitimate rooms.
If there are you'd be including mezzanine floors which have incredibly low ceilings and are not fit to have people working in them.
The palace used to racially segregate staff. In 1968, Charles Tryon, 2nd Baron Tryon, acting as treasurer to Queen Elizabeth II, sought to exempt Buckingham Palace from full application of the Race Relations Act 1968.[66][67] He stated that the palace did not hire people of colour for clerical jobs, only as domestic servants. He arranged with civil servants for an exemption that meant that complaints of racism against the royal household would be sent directly to the Home Secretary and kept out of the legal system.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
Why is he such a charmless tosser in public then?
Such a charmless tosser he has won the presidency. Twice
Don't you claim you helped furnish charmless Starmer with a landslide?
Charmless psychopath Putin wins election after election with increasing percentages. Even bumbling twat Johnson won a landslide too.
The electorate is often not a great reflection of taste, or even what might be in their own interests. Snake oil can provide the basis for a heady cocktail.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
You need Waze (set to not reveal your use to other users, since it’s illegal in France)
Merci!
I've just looked into this and it might explain why I keep infringing (when I really am quite careful). Often French roads do not have speed limit signage, you are expected to "know"
Everyone in France uses Waze, despite it being illegal to have a database showing where the speed cameras and police traps are. Just make sure you have it set to incognito settings and, if you get pulled over, exit the App before les gendarmes arrive at your car window.
You can’t record the fixed camera positions in France, so everyone logs them as police checks on Waze. France is the one country where Google Maps won’t help you, for the reasons given in the article.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
77,000 m² vs 112,000 m² according to Google, so not that different in terms of space - but, yeah, I'd suggest housing only the debating chambers and perhaps some of the committee rooms in the palace building itself. Temporary offices in the garden would be the way to go - there should be more than enough space in the lawn area, so you wouldn't be needing to cut down any trees etc.
Most of that space is either wide corridors, or small rooms. The ball room would work as a chamber, but there probably isn't another room big enough to work as a second one.
Aren't the builders in at Buck House? I thought that was why HMK has not moved in.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
This morning I received my first speeding fine in 20 years for doing 24 mph in a 20 mph zone in Kew at 10:20 on a Sunday morning. I'm normally careful. I just can't remember this event. I'll just pay up or agree to be re-educated.
Getting a fine for doing 24mph in a 20mph zone seems absurd. Gouging
Also one often HAS to speed, briefly, in a big city like London - to avoid accidents. A wobbly bicyclist, a dog running into the road, there are many times the best thing you can do is press the pedal and get past quickly
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
Footprint of Buckingham Palace is 77,000 square metres and 800 rooms
Footprint of Palace of Westminster is 112,000 square metres and 1100 rooms.
They'd have to utch up a bit, but they also have Portcullis House and could put Portakabins in the palace garden.
I'd question if there are actually 800 legitimate rooms.
If there are you'd be including mezzanine floors which have incredibly low ceilings and are not fit to have people working in them.
The palace used to racially segregate staff. In 1968, Charles Tryon, 2nd Baron Tryon, acting as treasurer to Queen Elizabeth II, sought to exempt Buckingham Palace from full application of the Race Relations Act 1968.[66][67] He stated that the palace did not hire people of colour for clerical jobs, only as domestic servants. He arranged with civil servants for an exemption that meant that complaints of racism against the royal household would be sent directly to the Home Secretary and kept out of the legal system.
Amazing! 1968.
Yes, we've come a long way very quickly. Also recall that some trade unions were rather racist.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
As a pedant I feel compelled to note that no civil servants work in Parliament. However, under the House of Commons Administration Act 1978 their terms and conditions of service of staff must be kept 'broadly in line' with the Home Civil Service.
Idea
Relocate Parliament and hangers on to a tent city in an empty field in the middle of nowhere.
They can build what they want - buildings, roads, railways. From scratch. And if they want to hold planning enquiries for a decade about it, fine.
We can use my idea for trimming down the civil service. Send everyone home and call them in when you need them. Anyone not called in after six months gets an additional six months severance and is waved off. Super generous terms but you’d chop the admin bill by 30% in a year’s time.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
Why is he such a charmless tosser in public then?
Such a charmless tosser he has won the presidency. Twice
Don't you claim you helped furnish charmless Starmer with a landslide?
Charmless psychopath Putin wins election after election with increasing percentages. Even bumbling twat Johnson won a landslide too.
The electorate is often not a great reflection of taste, or even what might be in their own interests. Snake oil can provide the basis for a heady cocktail.
I'm merely pointing out that he did the necessary to win two elections. So obviously he's either charming a surprising number of people, making him charming by definition, or the opposition is deemed as being even worse
Never have much problem with parking apps to be fair. They are a good idea. Being able to add time remotely is a really useful advantage over the old meters.
But, there should be just one universal app. Downloading a plethora of apps is a pain. The government should invite tenders and contract it out over a four/five year period or some such.
What do you think about them accepting cash?
No point. It’s a pointless antiquated form of barter that people rarely have about their person these days. Also, maintaining mechanical cash meters is problematic.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
77,000 m² vs 112,000 m² according to Google, so not that different in terms of space - but, yeah, I'd suggest housing only the debating chambers and perhaps some of the committee rooms in the palace building itself. Temporary offices in the garden would be the way to go - there should be more than enough space in the lawn area, so you wouldn't be needing to cut down any trees etc.
Most of that space is either wide corridors, or small rooms. The ball room would work as a chamber, but there probably isn't another room big enough to work as a second one.
Aren't the builders in at Buck House? I thought that was why HMK has not moved in.
Yeah, I believe they left the north wing, where the queen used to live, until last so she was not kicked out and it could be done when she died.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
I suppose people with age related dementia have good and bad days.. My mother in law was like that. One day unusually civil, most days the joyless, impish fun vacuum she had perfected throughout her life.
The "flag" seems to get used these days when a poster merely disagrees with another poster. Unless of course Donald Trump is posting on here and is as incredibly thin skinned as the reports suggest. I wonder who he posts as? I have an idea ...
Never have much problem with parking apps to be fair. They are a good idea. Being able to add time remotely is a really useful advantage over the old meters.
But, there should be just one universal app. Downloading a plethora of apps is a pain. The government should invite tenders and contract it out over a four/five year period or some such.
What do you think about them accepting cash?
No point. It’s a pointless antiquated form of barter that people rarely have about their person these days. Also, maintaining mechanical cash meters is problematic.
Just saw some pictures of Notre Dame and have to say well done to the French, it looks like a great restoration and they've avoided some of the idiotic suggestions of modernisation and they've done it much faster than we would have. Bravo.
Hopefully when the Palace of Westminster inevitably burns down from neglect and delay they can select the same people to restore it as the ones who did Notre Dame.
Only if we resite Parliament.
I would recommend Loghborough.
I recommend Buckingham Palace.
Good idea. The Ballroom is bigger than the Lords and Commons chambers combined, St James's Palace is still where the court officially resides, and the King actually lives in Clarence House. The only bits of Buckingham Palace that are actually used for worthwhile state functions are the State Dining Room, the Throne Room, and the garden - and there are plenty of potential alternatives for all three
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
It's not practical. There would not be enough office space for the civil servants let alone any MPs who would need an office on site. Unless you build temporary ones in the garden.
Portcullis House, which houses 213 MPs and their staff, would still be available.
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
100s of civil servants work in the Palace of Westminster to facilitate it. Having worked in both Palaces, I can tell you it's a non-starter. Buckingham palace barely has enough desk space for the staff that work there now.
As a pedant I feel compelled to note that no civil servants work in Parliament. However, under the House of Commons Administration Act 1978 their terms and conditions of service of staff must be kept 'broadly in line' with the Home Civil Service.
Idea
Relocate Parliament and hangers on to a tent city in an empty field in the middle of nowhere.
They can build what they want - buildings, roads, railways. From scratch. And if they want to hold planning enquiries for a decade about it, fine.
We can use my idea for trimming down the civil service. Send everyone home and call them in when you need them. Anyone not called in after six months gets an additional six months severance and is waved off. Super generous terms but you’d chop the admin bill by 30% in a year’s time.
Is this part of a competition to come up with the most bonkers policy proposal ever?
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
This morning I received my first speeding fine in 20 years for doing 24 mph in a 20 mph zone in Kew at 10:20 on a Sunday morning. I'm normally careful. I just can't remember this event. I'll just pay up or agree to be re-educated.
Getting a fine for doing 24mph in a 20mph zone seems absurd. Gouging
Also one often HAS to speed, briefly, in a big city like London - to avoid accidents. A wobbly bicyclist, a dog running into the road, there are many times the best thing you can do is press the pedal and get past quickly
Doing 24 in a 20 will get you a fine in London, if you’re passing a speed camera at the time.
On the parking thing - it needs regulating. Casino rightly described the parking companies as vultures - they exist to issue tickets and send threatening letters. Operating a car park is merely their entrapment scam.
I had a run-in with one of them a decade or so back. Parked in a leisure park on the edge of the town centre. Crossed the road at the edge of the park, went into one shop for 2 minutes then into the cinema on the park. Came back and found that I had been ticketed for "leaving the leisure park".
So I went round with a camera doing my research. There was a sign with their terms and conditions. Not on the access road I entered on, not in the car park I parked in, not on the (extended) footpath to the pedestrian crossing by the cinema which I briefly crossed. Off in the other corner where no-one could see it. Whats more there's no cameras at the pedestrian crossing owned by the leisure park (just traffic cams pointing at traffic on the crossing lights).
So how had I been seen breaking the rule that I hadn't contractually accepted? Then I spotted the gnome in his cabin. Genuinely sculking about following pedestrians. Their evidence was their employee following me to catch me leaving.
Lets just say that I had fun writing the successful appeal letter...
My favourite car park experience was getting a fine for parking in my father’s parking space in a car park he owned. A half hour argument on the phone with the company where I was trying to explain to them I had done nothing wrong and desperately trying not to pull the “my dad owns the fucking car park” card ensued. Ultimately I had to say “my dad owns the fucking car park” as they wouldn’t accept the fact that they had no reason to fine me anyway.
We had exactly the same experience with a car park in central Derby (since redeveloped); except they did it to the owner (who had an agreement for free use of the car park). IIRC he sent the fine letter back to them with a letter threatening termination of the contract to lease the land. They backed down...
My wife was got last week at a retail and leisure park. 5 hour free parking limit, which she didn’t know about but no doubt is written in small print on the notice boards.
2 hours at IKEA, then in to the cinema to watch a film with our daughter. All in all 5 hours 10 minutes. £45.
This sort of stuff really pisses people off. Yes, there will be people who egregiously break the rules and try to park for free. Yes, they may want people to leave as quickly as possible at busy times. But they're taking the piss going for people who overstay by a few minutes or make honest mistakes.
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Trouble is, if you’re the ruling party focusing on things like this you get the “cones hotline” jibes thrown at you.
Not if you just quietly and rapidly get on with dealing with it and say little or nothing, which is how nearly all government should be over the infinity of little things. What they need to communicate is where, in the big picture, they want to get and how they plan to get there. Sorting out stupid niggles in the system should be day by day bread and butter.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
I suppose people with age related dementia have good and bad days.. My mother in law was like that. One day unusually civil, most days the joyless, impish fun vacuum she had perfected throughout her life.
The "flag" seems to get used these days when a poster merely disagrees with another poster. Unless of course Donald Trump is posting on here and is as incredibly thin skinned as the reports suggest. I wonder who he posts as? I have an idea ...
People are saying I’m the best poster. I’m not so sure, but they are saying it. I do get over 5000 likes on the average post.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
You need Waze (set to not reveal your use to other users, since it’s illegal in France)
Merci!
I've just looked into this and it might explain why I keep infringing (when I really am quite careful). Often French roads do not have speed limit signage, you are expected to "know"
Everyone in France uses Waze, despite it being illegal to have a database showing where the speed cameras and police traps are. Just make sure you have it set to incognito settings and, if you get pulled over, exit the App before les gendarmes arrive at your car window.
You can’t record the fixed camera positions in France, so everyone logs them as police checks on Waze. France is the one country where Google Maps won’t help you, for the reasons given in the article.
Endless tickets for the most trivial offences was actually one of the reasons I abandoned my own car in London (plus I hardly ever used it anyway). Several times I wondered if I had even offended at all, but the process of challenging them is such a chore it's easier to pay up. The only time I did challenge was a parking fine in Camden and I won, but I did that because I had a distinct memory of the incident. How often is that the case?
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
I suppose people with age related dementia have good and bad days.. My mother in law was like that. One day unusually civil, most days the joyless, impish fun vacuum she had perfected throughout her life.
The "flag" seems to get used these days when a poster merely disagrees with another poster. Unless of course Donald Trump is posting on here and is as incredibly thin skinned as the reports suggest. I wonder who he posts as? I have an idea ...
People are saying I’m the best poster. I’m not so sure, but they are saying it. I do get over 5000 likes on the average post.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
This morning I received my first speeding fine in 20 years for doing 24 mph in a 20 mph zone in Kew at 10:20 on a Sunday morning. I'm normally careful. I just can't remember this event. I'll just pay up or agree to be re-educated.
Getting a fine for doing 24mph in a 20mph zone seems absurd. Gouging
Also one often HAS to speed, briefly, in a big city like London - to avoid accidents. A wobbly bicyclist, a dog running into the road, there are many times the best thing you can do is press the pedal and get past quickly
Doing 24 in a 20 will get you a fine in London, if you’re passing a speed camera at the time.
I'm not sure that doing 24 as you see it on your speedometer will. I think that your car probably overeggs your speed slightly and that the cameras are set slightly towards underestimation. Additionally the police probably allow you a slight leeway. All in all I guess you'd have to be going at something like 28 (on the speedometer) in a 20 to get a ticket.
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
Why is he such a charmless tosser in public then?
Such a charmless tosser he has won the presidency. Twice
Don't you claim you helped furnish charmless Starmer with a landslide?
Charmless psychopath Putin wins election after election with increasing percentages. Even bumbling twat Johnson won a landslide too.
The electorate is often not a great reflection of taste, or even what might be in their own interests. Snake oil can provide the basis for a heady cocktail.
I'm merely pointing out that he did the necessary to win two elections. So obviously he's either charming a surprising number of people, making him charming by definition, or the opposition is deemed as being even worse
Probably the latter
I don't suppose he has to be charming to win an election. Adolf was a humourless thin skinned tyrant. I suspect that's all it takes. Any charmless buffoon can paint a picture that "others" are ruining your lives through lies and fake news. If they then claim they are the answer to resolve the issue they win elections. They might have used guile, cunning and grift but they remained charmless throughout.
If it is you banging in the "flags" against my posts, although I am sure you are not that sad party, as you claim to quite justifiably ignore my ramblings, you've missed a trick. Anyone who has a dozen active accounts could give a dozen flags for each post.
Speaking of parking fine anecdotes, my month in France in July has now produced no less than FIVE traffic offences, slowly arriving through my front door in London
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK 2. The French state desperately needs income 3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
You need Waze (set to not reveal your use to other users, since it’s illegal in France)
Merci!
I've just looked into this and it might explain why I keep infringing (when I really am quite careful). Often French roads do not have speed limit signage, you are expected to "know"
Everyone in France uses Waze, despite it being illegal to have a database showing where the speed cameras and police traps are. Just make sure you have it set to incognito settings and, if you get pulled over, exit the App before les gendarmes arrive at your car window.
You can’t record the fixed camera positions in France, so everyone logs them as police checks on Waze. France is the one country where Google Maps won’t help you, for the reasons given in the article.
Endless tickets for the most trivial offences was actually one of the reasons I abandoned my own car in London (plus I hardly ever used it anyway). Several times I wondered if I had even offended at all, but the process of challenging them is such a chore it's easier to pay up. The only time I did challenge was a parking fine in Camden and I won, but I did that because I had a distinct memory of the incident. How often is that the case?
But that's good advice on France. Ta
I’m still chuffed to have come back from the States for the first time ever without having been pulled over by a Sheriff or State Trooper.
My regular trick was to latch onto another speeding car on the Interstate and follow it at a respectable distance, but it was only more recently that someone tipped me off that this only works if you pick a car with an out-of-state numberplate.
And Americans are finally getting the hang of the ‘reporting’ button on Google maps, which helps greatly. 6,608 miles on the road this autumn, and not a single fine to show for it…result! Despite a close shave with one of Missouri’s infamous red light cameras.
Comments
The whole experience of using car parks is so shitty now. Fewer machines, often not taking cash. 1,001 different apps, terms and conditions that you would need a lawyer on hand to understand. Having to spend five minutes making a phone call rather than chucking a few coins into a machine or swiping a card.
I recently went into St Neots to do a run, but all the ticket machines were out of order. I went to talk to a council worker who was doing the bins, and he said they had not been working for a couple of days, and it was probably free parking. I risked it, and did not get into trouble. I can imagine a non council-run car park would have led to a very different result.
Edit: if any politician wants to get the car users on side, then forget about the "war on the motorist", and instead sort out car park charging. It's an absolute vote winner.
Gone to take my daughter to a dentist appointment, all the spaces in front of the dentist are pay and display but were all occupied. Next to the spaces was a single yellow line so I checked the only visible signage to see what restrictions apply and it just says to pay and display so I did.
Got out of the dentist after her appointment and saw a parking fine stuck to the car. Also saw the traffic wardens just down the road so went to politely speak to then and said I'd paid and displayed.
The male warden was a dick who just said there's a single yellow line there so read the Highway Code (he should, it just means restrictions apply and those are normally on signage). I replied I'd checked the signage and it says pay and display and I had paid.
The female warden was much more polite, she replied apologetically to say that she had made a note on her system to say I had a valid paid for parking ticket displayed. She also explained that Wigan doesn't have signage for its single yellow lines (where I live they do) and said that she'd make a further note that I said I'd checked the signage and suggested I appeal.
Was busy and forgot to appeal in time, so thought I'd appeal when the inevitable fine came through the post. None ever did. That was nearly 10 months ago so not sure one ever will now. No idea if someone saw the notes and chose to cancel it, or if they're just less organised at chasing unpaid fines than the parasitical private firms.
Reeves had the opportunity to change that and blame the Tories. She fucked up. That is the source of my frustration with her.
She just spent more and didn’t raise enough taxes to pay for it. It’s the lack of ambition and the desire to reward her supporters that’s the problem.
All I suspect a knock-on consequence of the weakening of Hezbollah since Israel started attacking.
It is the only way to bring the budget back into balance and have an investment boost for national infrastructure.
The idea that we can endlessly raise tax without any economic penalties or that bringing back tax and spend to fix state services is simply ridiculous. It has never worked and it will never work, we will just end up poorer as the state continues to destroy economic activity by funnelling productivity gains in the private sector down the public sector black hole. There isn't a single departmental budget that could be increased without a resulting decrease in productivity.
That's the honest truth, cut spending on welfare, increase spending on infrastructure and reform public spending on services by cutting 3 or 4 layers of middle management and administrative people who don't add anything to the customer experience but hugely detract from productivity.
We cannot afford more tax rises and we cannot afford more borrowing, both are at the limit cutting entitlements/welfare is the only option. Anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves and not being honest.
Iran, Russia, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas etc are a real Axis of Evil that have supported each other in the past but the problem they have is they've all overstretched themselves now and are getting taken down pegs that mean they can't support each other.
Though like GWB originally suggested, now NK is getting involved helping Russia.
How did you find a dentist in Wigan?
The Tories lost in 1997 as they were tired, divided, disliked and had no economic credibility. Not because of cones.
Had Blair done a cones thing in 1998 nobody would be talking about it still.
We had 14 years of Tory government that left office with a higher expenditure on welfare than Gordon Brown left office with.
WTAF.
(if not already posted)
https://www.rte.ie/player/onnow
https://www.rte.ie/news/election-24/results/#/national
Thanks,
DC
Froth Be Praised !
Thanks for the header on a Saturday.
(Edit: Ooops. I meant Frith).
So people who don't drive out immediately into a non-bus lane get fined, even if it is night-time and the buses aren't running.
We need higher taxes to balance the books.
NI is a very cumbersome tax.
https://x.com/shashj/status/1862822868154794194?s=46
Local Jihadists who may or may not have gone more secular and mainstream over time. So, unsavoury and not the sort of chaps you’d want living next door, but not ISIS and not Assad. Sort of provisional IRA vibes.
If they’re successful I’d expect a period of factional in-fighting to follow.
It’s notable that they’ve had substantial military support from Turkey during this offensive. Next few weeks will be interesting.
That's the polar opposite of salting the earth.
In no way, shape or form is a net tax rise an unfunded tax cut.
(He said helpfully.)
But AIUI drop off and pick up is OK unless something on the location says not, even when No Loading / Waiting yellow kerb ticks are present.
(Yes, I did have to look it up. It's one of the more minor things I worry about.
eg the VIA ie official County contractor van, parked up yesterday lunchtime half-blocking the entrance pinch point to a traffic island, outside a busy chip shop with many coming and going, across the pedestrian crossing drop kerb so blocking wheelchairs, obscuring visibility of pedestrians crossing, half on the pavement so blocking *that* as well, whilst three of them took a single bag of asphalt out of the van to do a pothole, is rather more of a concern.)
I would recommend Loghborough.
There are certain obvious nonsenses, such as enforcement being almost impossible especially on my own drive, but also on private land, without a civil action. If I park my car on IDS's drive whilst having a day in London, there's very little he can do about it.
But what were you insinuating, pray?
He can move it off as long as he does not damage it as that would be criminal damage.
Mind you In the days of rogue clampers towing cars any damage reported by car owners from the extorters taking their car was merely dismissed as being ‘there when we took it’ and Plod couldn’t do a thing.
What was it that she said that was of interest?
https://x.com/thehonestlypod/status/1861477522413887557
WSJ columnist @PeggyNoonanNYC had refused to meet Trump for eight years: “I had a feeling that up close he would be charming and funny—and that it would mess with my swing as an observer.”
After finally meeting him a couple weeks ago, she told herself: “Honey, your intuition was right.”
News from Louth is that Fine Gael's McGahon is trailing the other FG candidate, a neat demonstration of how the STV voting system gives voters a chance to vote for their party, but against a candidate caught on video involved in a serious case of fisticuffs.
However the Times have not reported on the crucial point which would prove (as opposed to hint at) motive, and clinch their point.
Did the phone calls to relatives on the newly rediscovered phone continue for several months, or was it just a couple of days?
Is this reported elsewhere?
Full article:
https://archive.ph/mWigX
And 3rd party automate archive.today browser extension:
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/archivetoday-automator/mmhadhnchpgicjlmlcdfaapkekknnkha?hl=en&pli=1
Everyone in the safari was dissing Trump and she stayed quiet. Then she told me as an aside that she knew him very well and “he’s funny and very clever”
I got involved in this issue many years ago as a councillor, when there was a piece of vacant land, just large enough to park a car, on a corner just off Wanstead High Street.
Because the high street was usually parked up, people often used to chance parking there to run round the corner for a pint of milk - sadly for them, a bunch of complete cowboys - ironically posing as “Elite Parking Management” - had persuaded the owner to allow them to ‘manage’ parking on the plot, and they’d erected a small notice explaining that private clamping was in operation. Two guys used to sit all day in a van across the road, and the instant someone parked up and went round the corner for their milk, they’d leap out and clamp the car. The driver would return minutes later to find two threatening guys demanding £150 to release it. Some of the incidents when people had tried to argue back came close to violence.
As a councillor I was able to give the issue some publicity, through local media and my own literature, which at least alerted locals as to the danger. And I spent a Saturday afternoon warning off people from parking there, which annoyed the parking muggers hugely, and was a handy publicity stunt. But, happily, the coalition government was looking at the issue at that time, and I was able to liaise with the LibDem junior minister as the ban, eventually enacted within the Protection of Freedoms Act in 2012, made its way through parliament.
Their problem is that they don't drive a hard enough bargain, and their coalition partners end up claiming the credit for the things the Green party force them to do.
It'd mean restricting access to the public for the duration, but you could balance that by promising to opening up the whole thing (garden and all) once parliament is back in Westminster.
It doesn't seem to have been an option that's been considered by parliament, though - I wonder why not?
Dart Charge?
Which tbf he seems to have achieved.
I’ll get my own coat….
It's 7 minutes by bike. 19 minutes walking.
LHA are linked to the 30th market percentile for the type of dwelling (ie One bedroom for a couple, Two bedrooms for a couple with 2 children under 10 etc), and have always been subject to the bedroom tax, and are only reassessed every 3-5 years so are always at 20th percentile market level then reduced by 2-3 years of inflation.
But you are playing an old tune.
Housing benefit spending has fallen by about 60% in real terms since 2009. My photo quota. This is the total amount.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/283949/housing-benefit-united-kingdom-uk-government-spending/
The latest figures I have seen, which are several years old, have roughly 2/3 of that reduced number going to the social sector not the PRS. I suspect that that is driven by ~20 years of faster rent rises in the social sector over the PRS.
Footprint of Palace of Westminster is 112,000 square metres and 1100 rooms.
They'd have to utch up a bit, but they also have Portcullis House and could put Portakabins in the palace garden.
Three speeding fines, one maneuvering fine, one parking fine
Thing is, I am a fairly careful driver these days. I rarely speed. I was especially careful because half of that month I was ferrying my older daughter around
The fines were for things like "driving at 88kph in an 80kph temporary zone". The parking fine was an insane €135 for "parking in a disabled bay" - which I did, on a deserted Sunday, in a remote village in Provence, for about 40 minutes, with not a soul to be seen in the burning heat
From this I have deduced:
1. The French have speed cameras everywhere, it's worse than the UK
2. The French state desperately needs income
3. It will be a while before I willingly drive in France again
If there are you'd be including mezzanine floors which have incredibly low ceilings and are not fit to have people working in them.
Relocate Parliament and hangers on to a tent city in an empty field in the middle of nowhere.
They can build what they want - buildings, roads, railways. From scratch. And if they want to hold planning enquiries for a decade about it, fine.
I've just looked into this and it might explain why I keep infringing (when I really am quite careful). Often French roads do not have speed limit signage, you are expected to "know"
https://www.thetravellinglindfields.com/2024/09/how-to-avoid-speeding-fines-in-france.html
The only part of the bill for housing subsidies that's growing is for pensioners (they're not affected by the benefits cap, and can access Housing Benefit which is less onerous than the housing component of UC).
It's hard not to conclude that we've tilted the system too far in favour of pensioners. At the very least, the triple lock needs to be scrapped before we can even think about further erosion of the safety net for people of working age.
I note:
The palace used to racially segregate staff. In 1968, Charles Tryon, 2nd Baron Tryon, acting as treasurer to Queen Elizabeth II, sought to exempt Buckingham Palace from full application of the Race Relations Act 1968.[66][67] He stated that the palace did not hire people of colour for clerical jobs, only as domestic servants. He arranged with civil servants for an exemption that meant that complaints of racism against the royal household would be sent directly to the Home Secretary and kept out of the legal system.
Amazing! 1968.
Charmless psychopath Putin wins election after election with increasing percentages. Even bumbling twat Johnson won a landslide too.
The electorate is often not a great reflection of taste, or even what might be in their own interests. Snake oil can provide the basis for a heady cocktail.
You can’t record the fixed camera positions in France, so everyone logs them as police checks on Waze. France is the one country where Google Maps won’t help you, for the reasons given in the article.
Also one often HAS to speed, briefly, in a big city like London - to avoid accidents. A wobbly bicyclist, a dog running into the road, there are many times the best thing you can do is press the pedal and get past quickly
https://collections.bristolmuseums.org.uk/stories/bristols-black-history/bristol-bus-boycott/
As ever, I'd also point out it's perfectly possible to go into reverse wrt rights. Rights that have been fought for over generations can be removed.
Probably the latter
A
S
H
But that's good advice on France. Ta
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2024/11/qatar-pre-qualifying-2024.html
Valuable points earned by Hulkenberg there.
If it is you banging in the "flags" against my posts, although I am sure you are not that sad party, as you claim to quite justifiably ignore my ramblings, you've missed a trick. Anyone who has a dozen active accounts could give a dozen flags for each post.
My regular trick was to latch onto another speeding car on the Interstate and follow it at a respectable distance, but it was only more recently that someone tipped me off that this only works if you pick a car with an out-of-state numberplate.
And Americans are finally getting the hang of the ‘reporting’ button on Google maps, which helps greatly. 6,608 miles on the road this autumn, and not a single fine to show for it…result! Despite a close shave with one of Missouri’s infamous red light cameras.