Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
I agree with that one ! My car is longer than the spaces at my local supermarket, which I assume are the minimum 2.4 x 4.8m.
Car spaces are from a different era. I discovered yesterday that Xpeng have a car coming to the UK that is 5.4m long - good luck parking that in your typical supermarket space
Back in 2004 I ended up with a Mercedes S Class, it used to occupy parts of four parking spots and I am an excellent parker, I needed all four when I opened a door.
I miss having a carriage clock in the car.
Apparently the looming problem with some car parks is that they cannot cope with extra weight of EV vehicles.
I think the bigger problem is the pick-up trucks, was in a small town centre car park last year and an idiot with a pick-up had managed to trap every other car in the car park. Though my EV is annoyingly over-sized, I'm not sure why VAG needed to make their EV floorpan so big.
It’s a pity I wasn’t allowed to buy a cybertruck..
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
You’re not wrong there !!
Wife has a smart car. Its hilarious to park it in spaces right at the back so there appears to be a space to cars driving up. The annoyance on the faces as they see the smart car is great.
But on a serious note, car park spaces and garage design in new builds really ought to be larger to take account of modern cars.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
I agree with that one ! My car is longer than the spaces at my local supermarket, which I assume are the minimum 2.4 x 4.8m.
Car spaces are from a different era. I discovered yesterday that Xpeng have a car coming to the UK that is 5.4m long - good luck parking that in your typical supermarket space
Back in 2004 I ended up with a Mercedes S Class, it used to occupy parts of four parking spots and I am an excellent parker, I needed all four when I opened a door.
I miss having a carriage clock in the car.
Apparently the looming problem with some car parks is that they cannot cope with extra weight of EV vehicles.
I think the bigger problem is the pick-up trucks, was in a small town centre car park last year and an idiot with a pick-up had managed to trap every other car in the car park. Though my EV is annoyingly over-sized, I'm not sure why VAG needed to make their EV floorpan so big.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
You’re not wrong there !!
Wife has a smart car. Its hilarious to park it in spaces right at the back so there appears to be a space to cars driving up. The annoyance on the faces as they see the smart car is great.
But on a serious note, car park spaces and garage design in new builds really ought to be larger to take account of modern cars.
Or people could drive sensible sized cars instead of these stupid wide SUVs, another absurd trend we have adopted from the US. We have a 7 seater car but it is a normal width and fits easily inside a normal car parking space, as long as some wanker hasn't parked their hulking beast of a vehicle right up to the line next to you (if they have you can usually park in such a way that they are the ones who will struggle to get in their car, not you). More often than not when you see the driver it is obvious that if they ate fewer pies or just got on a bike or walked somewhere from time to time they might have fewer problems getting in a regular sized car.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
As a thought provoker, I think it is about exposing that it is not - on current patterns - purely a zero sum game, so the "repurposing carriageway" is not a downside for motorists, since our habit has been to incorporate all sorts of otherwise useful space by default into dead space on carriageways. And it is a way of starting a useful conversation.
On the piccie I have posted, there is little or no loss to taking the space indicated off the carriageway, as it is not used so there is no benefit in keeping it.
In Central London a space like that would have street furniture and perhaps cycle parking on it - providing a benefit of keeping such off the "used" part of the footway, where street furniture, litter bins etc are often placed.
The benefits for pedestrians and carriageway users could be that the time to cross a narrower roundabout entrance is is much reduced, so safety is improved and traffic flow is eased. Plus the visual visual perception cause slower speeds at the roundabout. I'd be moving pavement clutter out of the routes used by pedestrians, and into this formerly redundant carriageway space, perhaps including a bench for older or disabled pedestrians to rest (the national guidance is every 50m or so), and some greenery.
To me making use this sort of are opportunities for adjustments with zero downsides for carriageway or footway users, and upside for all groups - in other words low-hanging fruit.
London wouldn’t move if every cyclist used a car. Stupid post.
Not every location is London. Stupid post.
London has the most traffic in the country. Therefore if it applies there, it will apply anywhere.
Don't be stupid.
Different places have different circumstances and different reasons for traffic.
I drive about 55 miles a day on my commute and almost all the time I am not at the speed limit it is because either I am at a junction so need to wait for lights/gap, or because one doing less than the speed limit (eg slow old driver, agricultural vehicle or cyclist) is blocking the lane and to overtake needs a gap in the oncoming traffic's lane.
Is that the same issues you face in London? Or do different places operate differently. 🤦♂️
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
I agree with that one ! My car is longer than the spaces at my local supermarket, which I assume are the minimum 2.4 x 4.8m.
Car spaces are from a different era. I discovered yesterday that Xpeng have a car coming to the UK that is 5.4m long - good luck parking that in your typical supermarket space
Back in 2004 I ended up with a Mercedes S Class, it used to occupy parts of four parking spots and I am an excellent parker, I needed all four when I opened a door.
I miss having a carriage clock in the car.
Apparently the looming problem with some car parks is that they cannot cope with extra weight of EV vehicles.
I think the bigger problem is the pick-up trucks, was in a small town centre car park last year and an idiot with a pick-up had managed to trap every other car in the car park. Though my EV is annoyingly over-sized, I'm not sure why VAG needed to make their EV floorpan so big.
Space for batteries
The SUV has same battery pack with a shorter wheelbase, it could lose some rear legroom without any issues ~10cm and the front is unused.
London wouldn’t move if every cyclist used a car. Stupid post.
Not every location is London. Stupid post.
London has the most traffic in the country. Therefore if it applies there, it will apply anywhere.
Don't be stupid.
Different places have different circumstances and different reasons for traffic.
I drive about 55 miles a day on my commute and almost all the time I am not at the speed limit it is because either I am at a junction so need to wait for lights/gap, or because one doing less than the speed limit (eg slow old driver, agricultural vehicle or cyclist) is blocking the lane and to overtake needs a gap in the oncoming traffic's lane.
Is that the same issues you face in London? Or do different places operate differently. 🤦♂️
London has a 20mph speed limit, so you are only likely to be overtaken by a cyclist.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
I agree with that one ! My car is longer than the spaces at my local supermarket, which I assume are the minimum 2.4 x 4.8m.
Car spaces are from a different era. I discovered yesterday that Xpeng have a car coming to the UK that is 5.4m long - good luck parking that in your typical supermarket space
Back in 2004 I ended up with a Mercedes S Class, it used to occupy parts of four parking spots and I am an excellent parker, I needed all four when I opened a door.
I miss having a carriage clock in the car.
Apparently the looming problem with some car parks is that they cannot cope with extra weight of EV vehicles.
Sod car parks – half the bridges over the Thames are on a watchlist for cracks.
London wouldn’t move if every cyclist used a car. Stupid post.
Not every location is London. Stupid post.
London has the most traffic in the country. Therefore if it applies there, it will apply anywhere.
Don't be stupid.
Different places have different circumstances and different reasons for traffic.
I drive about 55 miles a day on my commute and almost all the time I am not at the speed limit it is because either I am at a junction so need to wait for lights/gap, or because one doing less than the speed limit (eg slow old driver, agricultural vehicle or cyclist) is blocking the lane and to overtake needs a gap in the oncoming traffic's lane.
Is that the same issues you face in London? Or do different places operate differently. 🤦♂️
London has a 20mph speed limit, so you are only likely to be overtaken by a cyclist.
Precisely.
Most of the rest of the country is not London, thankfully.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
As a thought provoker, I think it is about exposing that it is not - on current patterns - purely a zero sum game, so the "repurposing carriageway" is not a downside for motorists, since our habit has been to incorporate all sorts of otherwise useful space by default into dead space on carriageways. And it is a way of starting a useful conversation.
On the piccie I have posted, there is little or no loss to taking the space indicated off the carriageway, as it is not used so there is no benefit in keeping it.
In Central London a space like that would have street furniture and perhaps cycle parking on it - providing a benefit of keeping such off the "used" part of the footway, where street furniture, litter bins etc are often placed.
The benefits for pedestrians and carriageway users could be that the time to cross a narrower roundabout entrance is is much reduced, so safety is improved and traffic flow is eased. Plus the visual visual perception cause slower speeds at the roundabout. I'd be moving pavement clutter out of the routes used by pedestrians, and into this formerly redundant carriageway space, perhaps including a bench for older or disabled pedestrians to rest (the national guidance is every 50m or so), and some greenery.
To me making use this sort of are opportunities for adjustments with zero downsides for carriageway or footway users, and upside for all groups - in other words low-hanging fruit.
My bee in bonnet is one way driving in towns. I think one way driving should be the default so you free up the other carriageway for other uses.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
Ban all cars !!
Not at all. But designing our roads to make it easy to get around with or without a car makes good sense. Better that than regarding anything other than car transport as an afterthought.
Yes but whining about roads designed many years ago when priorities were different achieves nothing.
Clearly no one who designs and measure car parking spaces has ever driven a Car other than a Smart Car
You’re not wrong there !!
Wife has a smart car. Its hilarious to park it in spaces right at the back so there appears to be a space to cars driving up. The annoyance on the faces as they see the smart car is great.
But on a serious note, car park spaces and garage design in new builds really ought to be larger to take account of modern cars.
Alternatively, build smaller cars.
Much of the size of cars is driven by safety features. Which bits do you want to take out?
Early modern psychometric test https://www.theodramatist.com/early-modern-europe Who would you have been in early modern Europe? The years between 1500 and 1789 broke the world open. The stability of church, of knowledge, of political order, even of our place in the cosmos—all of it was called into question and left unsettled, to be fought over. Out of that turmoil came a crowd of new movements: some drove the changes, some struggled to make sense of them, some fought to undo them, and not one came through untouched. A few you’ll recognize. Most you won’t. But every one of them still leaves its mark on the world you live in now. They are gathered here, and the questions that follow—most of them about you as you are today—will find where you would have stood in the chaos.
I am apparently:
The Virtuoso later 1600s · England · experimental philosopher Boyle, New Experiments Physico-Mechanical You trust the thing you can build, run, and watch over any grand system. You think the way to settle an argument is to rig the apparatus, gather honest witnesses, and report exactly what happened.
Representative figures Francis Bacon, Robert Boyle, Robert Hooke, Margaret Cavendish
Robert Boyle was a centrist dad of his day. Who knew?
Pretty well. ..He studied the chemistry of combustion and of respiration, and conducted experiments in physiology, where, however, he was hampered by the "tenderness of his nature" which kept him from anatomical dissections, especially vivisections, though he knew them to be "most instructing"... (Wikipedia)
It is entirely possible the next general election to be won on 22ish % of the vote (and a landslide too!)
Also, the geographic efficiency is going to matter far too much.
There must be a fair spread of results where LibLab (fewer votes but lending each other support where it's helpful) beats RefCon (more votes in total but fighting each other to a standstill).
Though thoughts and prayers for a PM taking over on that basis. You thought Starmer's win in 2024 was a loveless landslide...
We have a fairly new Yaris, essentially the same model as our previous Yaris. And yet for some reason this one is about 6 inches wider than its ancestor - I can't detect any more room inside. So now, although it's a smallish car, it juts out about 6 inches from our street parking space. Our road is narrow as it is, and although it's one way it's increasingly hazardous for vans, particularly, driving between the jutting-out cars.
I'd prefer cars to be designed to fit into existing parking spaces rather than parking spaces designed to accommodate unnecessarily wide or long cars.
Quite an interesting little thought provoker - look where people drive in slush to see which areas of the carriageway are "redundant". And therefore - in my head - which bits that we can consider recovering for pedestrians.
That's a very car-centric attitude. Why should everyone else have to accommodate the motorist? How about looking at where people want to walk and cycle, and then designing the roads so as to allow them to do do?
As a thought provoker, I think it is about exposing that it is not - on current patterns - purely a zero sum game, so the "repurposing carriageway" is not a downside for motorists, since our habit has been to incorporate all sorts of otherwise useful space by default into dead space on carriageways. And it is a way of starting a useful conversation.
On the piccie I have posted, there is little or no loss to taking the space indicated off the carriageway, as it is not used so there is no benefit in keeping it.
In Central London a space like that would have street furniture and perhaps cycle parking on it - providing a benefit of keeping such off the "used" part of the footway, where street furniture, litter bins etc are often placed.
The benefits for pedestrians and carriageway users could be that the time to cross a narrower roundabout entrance is is much reduced, so safety is improved and traffic flow is eased. Plus the visual visual perception cause slower speeds at the roundabout. I'd be moving pavement clutter out of the routes used by pedestrians, and into this formerly redundant carriageway space, perhaps including a bench for older or disabled pedestrians to rest (the national guidance is every 50m or so), and some greenery.
To me making use this sort of are opportunities for adjustments with zero downsides for carriageway or footway users, and upside for all groups - in other words low-hanging fruit.
Not gritting pavements as in your picture is such a indicator of where we are. Ice free roads and death trap pavements. Happens throughout the country IME and I'm sure the cost of consequent orthopaedic surgeries and fracture clinics exceeds that of buying pavement gritters and using them for one week a year.
Local hospital trusts should invest in pavement gritters and leaf sweepers. Good pensioner fodder this one, hope Andy is noting it.
I'm just putting in an objection to a planning proposal. Along the way I have discovered that Erewash Borough Council do not publish objections they receive on their website; to see them you have to make a trip during opening hours to the Council Office, or perhaps put in an FOI - which I think would not deliver a response within the consultation period.
My own Council in Ashfield have published them with names and addresses redacted for about 20 years.
What do other places do?
(My interest is piqued because this makes it more difficult for disabled people to engage, as they are lumped with driving to the Council office - but 40% of disabled adults do not have a driving license, or taking a taxi / Uber trip each way, which costs up to £20, and disabled people are more often in poverty. Or they can find another method, such as a long mobility aid trip, which up here is dodgy because of road conditions).
All documents relevent to a planning application should be made available for public inspection during said process. I don't believe there is a legal requirement to put them on a website.
If someone writes a letter, for example, a copy of the letter with personal details redacted, should be available for anyone to look at during the consultation.
There are lots of documents (reports, surveys and the like) which are an integral part of the process and these are nowadays routinely digital but there's no assumption everyone has digital access so they need to be available in alternative formats.
The legal setup would (I think) be from the period when John Prescott was using his ODPM to drive everything online at local councils in a period that was impossibly short. I ran a couple of projects, having to account for a list of 800 or so "services" "going online" about a year.
I'd surmise that local authorities had the option - the Erewash Planning Officer said as much - so it is a postcode lottery.
I would question whether the "come and visit" model is sustainable under Equality Law, as it is imo a substantial disadvantage to some members of the community.
Perhaps but for example the Annual Statement of Accounts is required to be viewable so most Councils provide a ground floor room with a photocopier for those who want to investigate how badly their Council is managing its finances.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
I’m a cyclist.
Did ten miles this morning. Round Pelton and back. I have been a regular cyclist round here for over a decade.
Unlike the resident cyclist hating loons I recognise we all need to share the roads.
I grew up in Denmark, where cycle lanes are ubiquitous and traffic is therefore separate, no problem. There's an obvious problem in Britain with lots of narrowish streets with room for a pedestrian pavement and one car each way. Cyclists solve the issue differently, guaranteeing unpopularity. But basically the general rule is that the slowest should have priority - pedestrians over cyclists, and cyclists over cars.
We have a fairly new Yaris, essentially the same model as our previous Yaris. And yet for some reason this one is about 6 inches wider than its ancestor - I can't detect any more room inside. So now, although it's a smallish car, it juts out about 6 inches from our street parking space. Our road is narrow as it is, and although it's one way it's increasingly hazardous for vans, particularly, driving between the jutting-out cars.
I'd prefer cars to be designed to fit into existing parking spaces rather than parking spaces designed to accommodate unnecessarily wide or long cars.
Safety. Look at the thickness of a modern car door compared with one from the 1970s. Well, safety and somewhere to store a litre bottle of water.
This government is obsessed with the idea that AI will solve everything, when what’s actually needed is basic managerial competence. I guess that costs money though.
Currently, the main opposition party is Reform. It is ahead in the polls and in a panic the governing party is stealing its policies. The Conservative Party occasionally features, and its leader says nasty things to the PM which cheers the Party up, but it's not really winning arguments nor setting the agenda.
Keir Starmer says that the horrific attack in Belfast last night - which is being described as an attempted beheading - is 'sickening'
Police have confirmed that a Somalian man in his 30s has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder 'following a serious assault involving a knife'
The victim, who was in his 40s, is in a serious condition and has 'significant injuries to his face, neck and back'
Police are urging people not to reshare images or footage of the stabbing in North Belfast
Starmer: 'I have absolutely no tolerance for abhorrent scenes of violence like this on our streets.
'My thoughts are first and foremost with the victim, and I thank the first responders, including members of the public who intervened'
Hmm. Starmer has learned from his near-silence over Henry Nowak (and also the Southport murders?).
Double hmm. The Somalian attacker is now being described as Sudanese, which I guess the Somalian community might think is a reason for not giving out information at half-cock.
Same for @Mexicanpete, why are you allowed a private profile?
I didn't know I was.
I am quite happy to have all my smartie points available for the world to see.
I only got a bit arsy when a poster ventured into my personal non-PB social media and was furious that semi clad women with whom I had never corresponded were followers. Charles Manson would have thrown a wobbly under similar circumstances.
Ben Stokes is understood to be considering his future as an England cricketer after breaking the team curfew. One possibility is a two-match ban, which would rule him out of Test cricket until August, with no guarantee on current form of a recall
Ben Stokes is understood to be considering his future as an England cricketer after breaking the team curfew. One possibility is a two-match ban, which would rule him out of Test cricket until August, with no guarantee on current form of a recall
Same for @Mexicanpete, why are you allowed a private profile?
I didn't know I was.
I am quite happy to have all my smartie points available for the world to see.
I only got a bit arsy when a poster ventured into my personal non-PB social media and was furious that semi clad women with whom I had never corresponded were followers. Charles Manson would have thrown a wobbly under similar circumstances.
My occasional musings on politics, music and film on Social Media also seem to be popular amongst buxom young women unable to afford much in the way of clothing too. So it seems not to be a niche interest after all, and hope for the young, they do have minds suited for civic duty.
Ben Stokes is understood to be considering his future as an England cricketer after breaking the team curfew. One possibility is a two-match ban, which would rule him out of Test cricket until August, with no guarantee on current form of a recall
Same for @Mexicanpete, why are you allowed a private profile?
I didn't know I was.
I am quite happy to have all my smartie points available for the world to see.
I only got a bit arsy when a poster ventured into my personal non-PB social media and was furious that semi clad women with whom I had never corresponded were followers. Charles Manson would have thrown a wobbly under similar circumstances.
My occasional musings on politics, music and film on Social Media also seem to be popular amongst buxom young women unable to afford much in the way of clothing too. So it seems not to be a niche interest after all, and hope for the young, they do have minds suited for civic duty.
Oh they are gorgeous. Once finished I will send better pictures. The person making them is a real artist/craftsman. It is an absolute privilege working with him.
- Sudanese national is in custody - Immigration status of individual is thought to be that he was given leave to remain, Home Office to say more - Individual is believed to have come to the UK via the Republic of Ireland, and was then given leave to remain after moving from Dublin to Belfast.
- Sudanese national is in custody - Immigration status of individual is thought to be that he was given leave to remain, Home Office to say more - Individual is believed to have come to the UK via the Republic of Ireland, and was then given leave to remain after moving from Dublin to Belfast.
Holy s**t, how many miscarriages of justice will that cause?
Not sure, but I could check with Claude to find out?
How many times do we need to tell people that AI is really useful if all you want is a junior person who often lies (due to knowing no better) helping you...
- Sudanese national is in custody - Immigration status of individual is thought to be that he was given leave to remain, Home Office to say more - Individual is believed to have come to the UK via the Republic of Ireland, and was then given leave to remain after moving from Dublin to Belfast.
How does the CTA work with leave to remain? Could he have lived in NI on Irish leave to remain, if he had his own funds? Or does the CTA for living rather than tourism not apply until you have indefinite leave to remain or the Irish equivalent?
Oh they are gorgeous. Once finished I will send better pictures. The person making them is a real artist/craftsman. It is an absolute privilege working with him.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Currently, the main opposition party is Reform. It is ahead in the polls and in a panic the governing party is stealing its policies. The Conservative Party occasionally features, and its leader says nasty things to the PM which cheers the Party up, but it's not really winning arguments nor setting the agenda.
Sorry to be pedantic but Reform are no more the "main opposition party" now than the Alliance were when they led polls in the mid-80s.
The Conservatives, for all their many problems, are the credible alternative Government in terms of seats in the Commons. That may not be the case after the next election but until it is, it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who gets the questions at PMQs and it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who responds first to any Budget.
Currently, the main opposition party is Reform. It is ahead in the polls and in a panic the governing party is stealing its policies. The Conservative Party occasionally features, and its leader says nasty things to the PM which cheers the Party up, but it's not really winning arguments nor setting the agenda.
Sorry to be pedantic but Reform are no more the "main opposition party" now than the Alliance were when they led polls in the mid-80s.
The Conservatives, for all their many problems, are the credible alternative Government in terms of seats in the Commons. That may not be the case after the next election but until it is, it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who gets the questions at PMQs and it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who responds first to any Budget.
It's tempting to compare them to the Alliance, but Reform have already achieved a much more sustained breakthrough. The Alliance only led in the polling average for a couple of months.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
Currently, the main opposition party is Reform. It is ahead in the polls and in a panic the governing party is stealing its policies. The Conservative Party occasionally features, and its leader says nasty things to the PM which cheers the Party up, but it's not really winning arguments nor setting the agenda.
Sorry to be pedantic but Reform are no more the "main opposition party" now than the Alliance were when they led polls in the mid-80s.
The Conservatives, for all their many problems, are the credible alternative Government in terms of seats in the Commons. That may not be the case after the next election but until it is, it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who gets the questions at PMQs and it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who responds first to any Budget.
It's tempting to compare them to the Alliance, but Reform have already achieved a much more sustained breakthrough. The Alliance only led in the polling average for a couple of months.
EICIPM led for four years.
Midterm opinion polls mean diddly squat. What is sustained is when real General Elections occur.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
Holy s**t, how many miscarriages of justice will that cause?
Not sure, but I could check with Claude to find out?
How many times do we need to tell people that AI is really useful if all you want is a junior person who often lies (due to knowing no better) helping you...
At least junior people often know that they don't know the answer and should either research it, or escalate it to someone who does.
AI will just invent the answer rather than admitting it doesn't know much of the time.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
The world is a big place, and you can always find a few people who don't fit in. The original post referred to "cyclists" as a collective. I don't think it is fair to identify a large group with the actions of the most annoying member of that group.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
But - if the infrastructure you describe is as good as you say - he is presumably a rarity? Matt's point is completely true - cyclists use well-designed infrastructure which make their journeys better, but do not use badly designed infrastructure which make their journeys worse.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
It's not a matter of celebrating that one is stuck behind someone driving more slowly than you are comfortable doing. It's a matter of co-operating with other road users so everyone gets to their final destination in one piece.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
It's not a matter of celebrating that one is stuck behind someone driving more slowly than you are comfortable doing. It's a matter of co-operating with other road users so everyone gets to their final destination in one piece.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
We by and large do that very well. Our roads are incredibly safe, by both global and historic standards.
People are exceptionally unlikely to get hurt on our roads.
I can be irritated by someone holding up the traffic while reacting safely. Indeed waiting to drive in the oncoming traffic's lane in a gap rather than overtake in-lane is frequently the reason for the snarl up.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
But - if the infrastructure you describe is as good as you say - he is presumably a rarity? Matt's point is completely true - cyclists use well-designed infrastructure which make their journeys better, but do not use badly designed infrastructure which make their journeys worse.
Well, yes, and I agree with Matt about infrastructure.
This cyclist is a rarity because that is in fact legally a motorway link road and therefore cyclists shouldn't actually be on it at all. But that makes him all the more noticeable. The point I am making though is that you will always get some idiots so the three categories are not all-inclusive.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Your final comment: yes, that’s what I was thinking when I read those Labour MPs’ claims.
Much easier to blame a football match than admit the reality - they were not popular enough to win because they had overseen a total mess up of the economy. (Which was, in fairness, not entirely their fault.)
Just as the Labour left constantly blame the Falklands War for 1983, when actually it was mostly due to their own terrible mistakes.
The Longest Suicide Note In History was what created 1983.
I remember, as a child, a trade union activist on stage at the (televised) Labour conference arguing that the U.K. should leave NATO and the EEC and join COMECON and the Warsaw Pact.
The Falklands War made the Conservative majority a bit bigger.
Classic correlation not causation.
Is that the Falklands, Labour’s manifesto, or the size of the bribe paid to the official in question by Moscow?
Thank goodness with Labour jettisoning socialism we no longer have any politicians left who would trouser dirty Russian money.
There's plenty of socialism that isn’t like the comic Suicide Note manifesto.
It’s not a choice between unfettered capitalism and East Germany. As large numbers of social democratic parties have proved, around the world.
If the Labour Party had been selling the politics of, say, the German SPD, in 1983, them there would have been no split. And they might well have won a majority at the election.
Instead they chose East Germany.
Thatcher clearly led best PM polls in 1983 so likely would have won anyway
Yes... but after, and as a result of, the Falklands
See if you can guess when the Falklands War took place on this timeline.
I did politics as part of my degree. One of the modules was taken by David Marquand, ex-SDP MP. He made the point - using the graph below - that the Conservatives by the 1983 election were at the point they would have been anyway with swingback (I don't think he called it that, but it's a term we all use). They had a spike with the Falklands War, but then started to fade back, before a final recovery in the way governing parties often do (and especially when the leader of the opposition is insanely left wing). His view was that had Argentina not invaded the Falklands the result in 1983 would have been pretty much exactly the same. It's worth noting that by the standards of GEs at the time, the Tories didn't do THAT well in terms of share of the popular vote - the landslide was delivered - as it always is - by how badly the party doing second had done.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
It's not a matter of celebrating that one is stuck behind someone driving more slowly than you are comfortable doing. It's a matter of co-operating with other road users so everyone gets to their final destination in one piece.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
My 14-year old daughter* is doing a sponsored coast to coast bike ride the weekend after next, so I have an unusually heightened sense of cycle safety at the moment (not least after the headmaster at her school was killed cycling home a couple of months back). I'm generally fairly relaxed about sharing a road with vehicle traffic, but you notice driver behaviour a lot more when your daughter is on the road. My perspective is that almost all drivers are pretty considerate, especially in towns or on small country lanes. Trying to force an overtake which isn't there is very rare; they will almost always wait to be waved on. The roads which worry me though are country A roads. With my daughter, I will go a long way out of my way to avoid these. It's not even that I blame the drivers: but if the expectation is that you can be travelling at 60mph, you can very quickly be on a slow moving vehicle you didn't expect to be there.
*actually the two of us - but she is the one fundraising; I'm just there to keep an eye.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
It's not a matter of celebrating that one is stuck behind someone driving more slowly than you are comfortable doing. It's a matter of co-operating with other road users so everyone gets to their final destination in one piece.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
My 14-year old daughter* is doing a sponsored coast to coast bike ride the weekend after next, so I have an unusually heightened sense of cycle safety at the moment (not least after the headmaster at her school was killed cycling home a couple of months back). I'm generally fairly relaxed about sharing a road with vehicle traffic, but you notice driver behaviour a lot more when your daughter is on the road. My perspective is that almost all drivers are pretty considerate, especially in towns or on small country lanes. Trying to force an overtake which isn't there is very rare; they will almost always wait to be waved on. The roads which worry me though are country A roads. With my daughter, I will go a long way out of my way to avoid these. It's not even that I blame the drivers: but if the expectation is that you can be travelling at 60mph, you can very quickly be on a slow moving vehicle you didn't expect to be there.
*actually the two of us - but she is the one fundraising; I'm just there to keep an eye.
Good luck to her (and you, of course!) Who is she fundraising for?
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
Thanks for the warning. I'll watch out for him on my way to and from Makerfield on Saturday!
That is astonishingly reckless behaviour, in terms of his own and others safety, even more so if you mean the extended section of dual carriageway south of the Gailey roundabout, where traffic speeds are as high as you get on any dualled A road.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
Thanks for the warning. I'll watch out for him on my way to and from Makerfield on Saturday!
That is astonishingly reckless behaviour, in terms of his own and others safety, even more so if you mean the extended section of dual carriageway south of the Gailey roundabout, where traffic speeds are as high as you get on any dualled A road.
I doubt if you'll see him Saturday, as I meant 'every weekday.' He commutes by bike to the i59 business park.
Oh they are gorgeous. Once finished I will send better pictures. The person making them is a real artist/craftsman. It is an absolute privilege working with him.
President Donald Trump broke off an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” that aired Sunday after host Kristen Welker challenged his false claims about elections and the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
“Let’s call it quits because I’ve had enough,” he said after a tense exchange lasting about four minutes. “Thank you, darling. Have a good time.”
He then stood up and walked off the set in a barn in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, taped before an event focused on farmers that Trump held there Friday.
But you might not have heard of it, if you live in the Seattle area (or any other place with a Sinclair TV station). Ours did mention the interview — but for some reason did not include the TACO that ended it. Which was, by far, the most interesting part of the story.
For years and years I have argued that bias in our news media is more a matter of what they choose to cover — and what they choose to skip. But you seldom see an example for my argument this neat — and this funny.
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
It's not a matter of celebrating that one is stuck behind someone driving more slowly than you are comfortable doing. It's a matter of co-operating with other road users so everyone gets to their final destination in one piece.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
My 14-year old daughter* is doing a sponsored coast to coast bike ride the weekend after next, so I have an unusually heightened sense of cycle safety at the moment (not least after the headmaster at her school was killed cycling home a couple of months back). I'm generally fairly relaxed about sharing a road with vehicle traffic, but you notice driver behaviour a lot more when your daughter is on the road. My perspective is that almost all drivers are pretty considerate, especially in towns or on small country lanes. Trying to force an overtake which isn't there is very rare; they will almost always wait to be waved on. The roads which worry me though are country A roads. With my daughter, I will go a long way out of my way to avoid these. It's not even that I blame the drivers: but if the expectation is that you can be travelling at 60mph, you can very quickly be on a slow moving vehicle you didn't expect to be there.
*actually the two of us - but she is the one fundraising; I'm just there to keep an eye.
Yes. Most car drivers are fine. But even if it's only ~1% of car drivers who are reckless, they put other people at risk.
In a similar way, most cyclists don't want to be in anyone else's way. But there's a pervasive attitude - which is what started this conversation - that they are being deliberately difficult and in some way deserve what's coming to them. I've experienced a lot of hostility from car drivers which basically boils down to them being enraged that I dare to be on the road (which actually I generally don't anymore, eventually I just couldn't take the worry).
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Looks like Stokes is about to quit altogether. Not just the captaincy but from international cricket.
Although there is a possibility he may just ask for a two month break. Even so that would surely be the end of his captaincy.
Which presumably makes Brook captain and Duckett (FEC) (Although Bethel may be FEC). Although I thought Gay was brilliant.
Isn't Duckett older than Brook? I suspect you are more likely right about Bethell.
Duckett would probably be a better captain than Brook, but actually both of them would be unfortunate choices under these circumstances. I wonder if they might ask Root to fill in for a couple of Tests?
Andy Burnham to increase use of migrant detention centres. Socially right. Good.
Dunno. Sounds like something from the Blair years. The anger is coming from people who want migrants out of the country. They don't want them locked up in detention centres, they want them deported, or towed back to France. And the anger is in large part now about migrants with the legal right to live in the country.
So the question is whether Burnham is willing to make the case for legal migration, or if he is going to reduce migration to the extent that people notice the difference? If he does the same as every other politician for the last three decades - of falling between those two extremes - then he's not going to do anything to defuse the current anger.
Nigel can make hay with that then. A previously harmonic corner of the UK is now riven with a sectarian disharmony.
Good old PB. The guy is a Somali migrant so let’s minimise what’s been done 🙄
I am not having that. No one is minimising what he has done. A bad man has blinded another man whilst attempting to murder him. No mitigation from me mate. A **** is a ****!
Kyle Clifford who murdered Radio5 Live Commentator John Hunt's wife and two of his daughters with a crossbow is a vile individual. Would he be more vile if he were Sudanese?
Another **** who murdered the daughter of a retired Judge in East London has been sentenced. Should the sentence have been longer if he were Bangladeshi? My view is throw away the key irrespective of creed, colour or location of birth.
Andy Burnham to increase use of migrant detention centres. Socially right. Good.
Dunno. Sounds like something from the Blair years. The anger is coming from people who want migrants out of the country. They don't want them locked up in detention centres, they want them deported, or towed back to France. And the anger is in large part now about migrants with the legal right to live in the country.
So the question is whether Burnham is willing to make the case for legal migration, or if he is going to reduce migration to the extent that people notice the difference? If he does the same as every other politician for the last three decades - of falling between those two extremes - then he's not going to do anything to defuse the current anger.
There is no way any politician can reduce migration to the extent people will notice. That’s why the right is doing well across all of Europe
Specially designed cycle paths on the hill out of Brixham and towards Paignton. Specifically introduced to help cyclist safety from large articulated fish lorries, and seasonal traffic.
Cyclists generally ignore it, block traffic cause gridlock.
Many with more fecking cameras on them than GCHQ... Ready to report you for yelling "get on the fucking cycle path" as you drive past.
There are three types of cycle path.
1. Well-designed cycle paths that make cycling better - cyclists will use these paths. 2. Badly-designed cycle paths that make cycling more dangerous, or less convenient - cyclists will not use these paths. 3. Paint on the road surface - car drivers will ignore these.
Which category are the ones you are talking about?
Much though I hate to defend that poster, that's not altogether true. Next to the A449 from Wolverhampton to Penkridge (on both sides) is a cycleway that's beautifully laid out. It's wide, straight, surfaced properly, grade separated, no pedestrians and has pelican crossings so you can navigate safely. It must be the best cycleway in the whole Midlands.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
If that total idiot was in a car he would not be causing traffic either.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
It's not a matter of celebrating that one is stuck behind someone driving more slowly than you are comfortable doing. It's a matter of co-operating with other road users so everyone gets to their final destination in one piece.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
My 14-year old daughter* is doing a sponsored coast to coast bike ride the weekend after next, so I have an unusually heightened sense of cycle safety at the moment (not least after the headmaster at her school was killed cycling home a couple of months back). I'm generally fairly relaxed about sharing a road with vehicle traffic, but you notice driver behaviour a lot more when your daughter is on the road. My perspective is that almost all drivers are pretty considerate, especially in towns or on small country lanes. Trying to force an overtake which isn't there is very rare; they will almost always wait to be waved on. The roads which worry me though are country A roads. With my daughter, I will go a long way out of my way to avoid these. It's not even that I blame the drivers: but if the expectation is that you can be travelling at 60mph, you can very quickly be on a slow moving vehicle you didn't expect to be there.
*actually the two of us - but she is the one fundraising; I'm just there to keep an eye.
Yes. Most car drivers are fine. But even if it's only ~1% of car drivers who are reckless, they put other people at risk.
In a similar way, most cyclists don't want to be in anyone else's way. But there's a pervasive attitude - which is what started this conversation - that they are being deliberately difficult and in some way deserve what's coming to them. I've experienced a lot of hostility from car drivers which basically boils down to them being enraged that I dare to be on the road (which actually I generally don't anymore, eventually I just couldn't take the worry).
Most drivers are reasonable. Most cyclists are reasonable.
Some drivers are pricks. Some cyclists are pricks.
Andy Burnham to increase use of migrant detention centres. Socially right. Good.
Dunno. Sounds like something from the Blair years. The anger is coming from people who want migrants out of the country. They don't want them locked up in detention centres, they want them deported, or towed back to France. And the anger is in large part now about migrants with the legal right to live in the country.
So the question is whether Burnham is willing to make the case for legal migration, or if he is going to reduce migration to the extent that people notice the difference? If he does the same as every other politician for the last three decades - of falling between those two extremes - then he's not going to do anything to defuse the current anger.
There is no way any politician can reduce migration to the extent people will notice. That’s why the right is doing well across all of Europe
The only way to then reduce public anger is to win the political argument for immigration. Politicians have spent decades pretending that they were going to control immigration, that it was going to be clamped down on. If that was never possible they shouldn't have promised it.
Andy Burnham to increase use of migrant detention centres. Socially right. Good.
Dunno. Sounds like something from the Blair years. The anger is coming from people who want migrants out of the country. They don't want them locked up in detention centres, they want them deported, or towed back to France. And the anger is in large part now about migrants with the legal right to live in the country.
So the question is whether Burnham is willing to make the case for legal migration, or if he is going to reduce migration to the extent that people notice the difference? If he does the same as every other politician for the last three decades - of falling between those two extremes - then he's not going to do anything to defuse the current anger.
There is no way any politician can reduce migration to the extent people will notice. That’s why the right is doing well across all of Europe
The goalposts keep moving anyway. The last figures released if one takes account of students and others on a guaranteed return is a net of around plus 70,000. Farage has stated it doesn't count because the people leaving are nice people who Farage likes, whilst those arriving are nasty people Farage doesn't like.
Farage just wants to chuck everyone out who isn't a gurning pasty twat like him.
You'll all be sorry when anyone who is allowed to stay has to look like Farage.
A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.
Council rejects 100 homes.
Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.
Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.
End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.
we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.
That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.
No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.
If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.
In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…
So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.
Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!
Peter.
We've spent 25 years trying the approach of allowing mass immigration to increase the working age population in the face of what would otherwise be a natural decline and it has led to poor productivity growth, stagnant wages, inflated asset values and political instability. It's about time the people who advocated it learned to have some humility.
We have had 25 years of large scale immigration. We have increased the working age population. We have so far managed to avoid the economic cliff edge of a naturally declining population. We have had low productivity and low wage growth.
And you have abjectly failed to establish a causal link between them.
Other Countries with high immigration have had productivity growth; the US for one.
Developed Countries like Japan have had slow wage growth and little immigration.
Peter.
The onus isn't on me to prove a causal link. I have democracy on my side.
No you have Populism and what’s popular isn’t always right and what’s right isn’t always popular.
Essential you are adopting the Trumpian logic, that for something to be true the majority just has to believe it.
Much like his Meet the Press walk out. His evidence consisted of only what he believed, nothing more.
I am old fashioned, I like evidence based argument and still believe in objective truth.
Peter.
That’s not Trumpoan logic. It’s politics.
We’ve had governance by opinion poll for many years.
It hasn't worked very well.
So, you don't like democracy then?
The problem is people having factually wrong opinions. On immigration for example you can legitimately want less of it, or be comfortable with a high level. But it's a problem if people think that immigration is currently very high when it isn't, or that most new housing goes to immigrants when it doesn't, and politicians devise policies based on those demonstrably wrong perceptions.
I think your biggest problem (and that of your liberal ilk) is that you think you're always right - and any contrary opinion is therefore "wrong" - and are totally blind to the fact you have an ideology of your own; you genuinely think the facts support it.
I'd anchor that ideology around the complete fungibility of all individuals, and championing things like choosing your own identity and free movement regardless of any evidence of the social problems this causes.
We all suffer from cognitive bias, whether we are liberal or illiberal. We get comfort from people who think like us and get frustrated by people who don't. We all look for evidence that supports our views and ignore evidence that doesn't. We all do.
The remedy is to be aware of that behaviour and actively manage it when it comes to evidence.
But our opinions also depend on our values and these are not evidence based but deeply and emotionally ingrained. It takes a lot to shift them.
So we can amicably disagree when it comes to values, but we shouldn't accept "alternative facts" when the evidence contradicts them.
My wife likes to say that I always think I am right, which she appears to find irritating. My response is always, of course I think I am right. Everybody thinks they are right. If I thought I was wrong I would have changed my mind. This is a criticism I really can't understand.
The implication might be someone is overly stubborn in accepting info which would make them realise they had been wrong before, but that's actually a separate issue.
I 'love' the headline - "300 migrants bound for UK kidnapped and threatened with kidney removal" I had no idea Reform were that serious about a hostile environment...
Comments
On the piccie I have posted, there is little or no loss to taking the space indicated off the carriageway, as it is not used so there is no benefit in keeping it.
In Central London a space like that would have street furniture and perhaps cycle parking on it - providing a benefit of keeping such off the "used" part of the footway, where street furniture, litter bins etc are often placed.
The benefits for pedestrians and carriageway users could be that the time to cross a narrower roundabout entrance is is much reduced, so safety is improved and traffic flow is eased. Plus the visual visual perception cause slower speeds at the roundabout. I'd be moving pavement clutter out of the routes used by pedestrians, and into this formerly redundant carriageway space, perhaps including a bench for older or disabled pedestrians to rest (the national guidance is every 50m or so), and some greenery.
To me making use this sort of are opportunities for adjustments with zero downsides for carriageway or footway users, and upside for all groups - in other words low-hanging fruit.
Different places have different circumstances and different reasons for traffic.
I drive about 55 miles a day on my commute and almost all the time I am not at the speed limit it is because either I am at a junction so need to wait for lights/gap, or because one doing less than the speed limit (eg slow old driver, agricultural vehicle or cyclist) is blocking the lane and to overtake needs a gap in the oncoming traffic's lane.
Is that the same issues you face in London? Or do different places operate differently. 🤦♂️
Most of the rest of the country is not London, thankfully.
What applies in London does not apply elsewhere.
..He studied the chemistry of combustion and of respiration, and conducted experiments in physiology, where, however, he was hampered by the "tenderness of his nature" which kept him from anatomical dissections, especially vivisections, though he knew them to be "most instructing"...
(Wikipedia)
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/artificial-intelligence-crown-court-backlog-uk-lammy-5HjdbJL_2/
There must be a fair spread of results where LibLab (fewer votes but lending each other support where it's helpful) beats RefCon (more votes in total but fighting each other to a standstill).
Though thoughts and prayers for a PM taking over on that basis. You thought Starmer's win in 2024 was a loveless landslide...
I'd prefer cars to be designed to fit into existing parking spaces rather than parking spaces designed to accommodate unnecessarily wide or long cars.
Local hospital trusts should invest in pavement gritters and leaf sweepers. Good pensioner fodder this one, hope Andy is noting it.
QTWTAIN
I will blame autocorrect.
https://x.com/gbpolitcs/status/2064328223580688816
The Belfast attacker was granted a 5-year visa by the UK government
I am quite happy to have all my smartie points available for the world to see.
I only got a bit arsy when a poster ventured into my personal non-PB social media and was furious that semi clad women with whom I had never corresponded were followers. Charles Manson would have thrown a wobbly under similar circumstances.
Ben Stokes is understood to be considering his future as an England cricketer after breaking the team curfew. One possibility is a two-match ban, which would rule him out of Test cricket until August, with no guarantee on current form of a recall
https://x.com/BoothCricket/status/2064336489220133054
But I sense the end is coming anyway. Test cricket is bloody hard on a 35 year old body.
I hope the chap who has been stabbed recovers.
I only thank the Lord, Lucy Letby wasn't Asian.
If not, some education in the local customs is in order.
Then there's the 2019 World Cup final, I can remember every moment of that match.
(Only one thing ruins it, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor presenting the trophy.)
PCNI spokesman says "we are used to dealing with protests in Northern Ireland" Cheeky!
https://www.lakelandwalling.co.uk/ If anyone's interested.
- Sudanese national is in custody
- Immigration status of individual is thought to be that he was given leave to remain, Home Office to say more
- Individual is believed to have come to the UK via the Republic of Ireland, and was then given leave to remain after moving from Dublin to Belfast.
https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8xwxdgvx8lo
The Conservatives, for all their many problems, are the credible alternative Government in terms of seats in the Commons. That may not be the case after the next election but until it is, it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who gets the questions at PMQs and it is Kemi Badenoch, not Nigel Farage, who responds first to any Budget.
Some utter twat persists, every day, in cycling rather slowly up the middle of the nearside lane of the dual carriageway, causing total chaos.
There is no excuse for that other than to be a total arsehole. Unless this person is such a total idiot he has not noticed the cycleway signs literally at his elbow, in which case he should probably not be allowed out without an escort.
Midterm opinion polls mean diddly squat. What is sustained is when real General Elections occur.
This is what our can't misguided think-beyond-their-own-experiences city dwellers fail to comprehend. Roads that typically travel at or about the speed limit can be seriously damaged by one individual who is not doing the limit that then snarls everyone behind them until they can get into a different lane to overtake.
Whether that one individual be an agricultural vehicle, the bin lorry, a cyclist or an elderly driver afraid to drive properly.
Shared spaces mean they can all be on the road, but the idea its great that they are and should be celebrated is not necessarily correct and depends upon the circumstances.
AI will just invent the answer rather than admitting it doesn't know much of the time.
There are too many drivers who seem to have either a death wish, or believe that they are invincible, or in their rage at being slightly inconvenienced and delayed lose all sense of proportion and put everyone else on the road in the vicinity at risk of death or serious injury.
People are exceptionally unlikely to get hurt on our roads.
I can be irritated by someone holding up the traffic while reacting safely. Indeed waiting to drive in the oncoming traffic's lane in a gap rather than overtake in-lane is frequently the reason for the snarl up.
This cyclist is a rarity because that is in fact legally a motorway link road and therefore cyclists shouldn't actually be on it at all. But that makes him all the more noticeable. The point I am making though is that you will always get some idiots so the three categories are not all-inclusive.
Although there is a possibility he may just ask for a two month break. Even so that would surely be the end of his captaincy.
My perspective is that almost all drivers are pretty considerate, especially in towns or on small country lanes. Trying to force an overtake which isn't there is very rare; they will almost always wait to be waved on. The roads which worry me though are country A roads. With my daughter, I will go a long way out of my way to avoid these. It's not even that I blame the drivers: but if the expectation is that you can be travelling at 60mph, you can very quickly be on a slow moving vehicle you didn't expect to be there.
*actually the two of us - but she is the one fundraising; I'm just there to keep an eye.
That is astonishingly reckless behaviour, in terms of his own and others safety, even more so if you mean the extended section of dual carriageway south of the Gailey roundabout, where traffic speeds are as high as you get on any dualled A road.
And yes, that's the section.
The Loser lost another fight. (Link omitted.)
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/06/07/trump-walks-out-meet-press-interview-when-challenged-over-false-claims/
But you might not have heard of it, if you live in the Seattle area (or any other place with a Sinclair TV station). Ours did mention the interview — but for some reason did not include the TACO that ended it. Which was, by far, the most interesting part of the story.
For years and years I have argued that bias in our news media is more a matter of what they choose to cover — and what they choose to skip. But you seldom see an example for my argument this neat — and this funny.
In a similar way, most cyclists don't want to be in anyone else's way. But there's a pervasive attitude - which is what started this conversation - that they are being deliberately difficult and in some way deserve what's coming to them. I've experienced a lot of hostility from car drivers which basically boils down to them being enraged that I dare to be on the road (which actually I generally don't anymore, eventually I just couldn't take the worry).
Duckett would probably be a better captain than Brook, but actually both of them would be unfortunate choices under these circumstances. I wonder if they might ask Root to fill in for a couple of Tests?
So the question is whether Burnham is willing to make the case for legal migration, or if he is going to reduce migration to the extent that people notice the difference? If he does the same as every other politician for the last three decades - of falling between those two extremes - then he's not going to do anything to defuse the current anger.
Kyle Clifford who murdered Radio5 Live Commentator John Hunt's wife and two of his daughters with a crossbow is a vile individual. Would he be more vile if he were Sudanese?
Another **** who murdered the daughter of a retired Judge in East London has been sentenced. Should the sentence have been longer if he were Bangladeshi? My view is throw away the key irrespective of creed, colour or location of birth.
Like I said, a **** is a ****!
Most cyclists are reasonable.
Some drivers are pricks.
Some cyclists are pricks.
Don't let the bastards get you down.
https://ageoftransformation.org/britains-rightwing-want-to-drill-for-nothing-in-the-north-sea/
Challenges to their assumptions, rather than kneejerk reactions, welcome for debate
Perhaps he'd have been less cringeworthy about inventing a prize to give to Trump, but I doubt it.
Farage just wants to chuck everyone out who isn't a gurning pasty twat like him.
You'll all be sorry when anyone who is allowed to stay has to look like Farage.
The 'into trouble' is key.