Marmora Man

you read it here first

Agree - tho' the staff that continue from Macey's are still helpful.

templeton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Has anyone read anything by George Pelecanos, who > was a producer and writer on the show. They are > absolutely brilliant, well worth a read if you > like the Wire. They are good and I have two here - free to any taker.

dukesdenver Wrote: Oh gosh, me too. I think he's fundamentally a decent man but events are just running away with him. The thought of 10 years with David Cameron as PM is utterly sick-making. I don't understand your dislike of David Cameron. We've had 12 years to assess GB and I think ????'s has made the point eloquently that he's flawed as a politician and as PM - I would add that his policies over the last 12 years have been for the worse rather than the better - his tendency to insist on Treasury control, his desire for micro management and set targets makes everything more complicated than it need be - and is a major flaw. What exactly has David Cameron done - he's remodelled the Conservatives, developed a string of sensible policies, he is an eloquent and persuasive speaker that can think on his feet, he has proved he can take tough decisions quickly rather than procrastinate as GB does.

Current Conservative policies are not this of '79 to '97 rewritten but a new template. To criticize today's Conservative party on the basis of that period does not make sense.

Keef - as you probably know I'm more of a Libertarian than strict Tory, but the Conservative party is closer to my thinking than any other. They are committed to reducing centralisation, target setting and unnecessary bureaucracy - all of which would help teachers, social workers and nurses. I know most about healthcare and next about education - but expect social workers would benefit from this simplification and loss of target setting culture. The Conservatives also believe in tackling many of current social ills from first principles - and, if these policies work (a big "if" but the ideas do have merit) this should feed thru' as reduced need for social services. See the centre for Social Justice site above. I agree that the two party system has problems - but could never support the alternative of proportional representation. Do you know who your MEP is - elected by PR? On the current front bench - yes there is a % of Eton educated people, but plenty of others from a less privileged background. But why does a good education preclude them from deploying common sense and effective politics? There are many others ? Michael Gove, Caroline Spelman, Jeremy Hunt, Liam Fox, Greg Barker, Nick Herbert and so on from perfectly ordinary backgrounds.

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the only viable alternative is a Tory government > > What a rousing slogan that is, and what a triumph > for a two party, FPTP system. Vote for us. You > know in your hearts we are a shower of > self-entitled, over-privileged cockstands, but we > are the only viable alternative. Ted Max - how about a real debate rather than student union leftish debating points? Your characterisation of the Tories is about 12 years out date. Which of their policies do you reject? Which of the current Labour policies do you support? Why is staying with this current administration better than switching to a Tory government? Which Labour politician stands out as a selfless and capable leader? Compare Andy Stranack with Harriet Harman and ask yourself which is likely to better represent the issues and concerns of an inner city constituency? You might also like to take a look at Centre for Social Justice to see the sort of policies that are being developed by the Conservative Party to tackle some really pressing issues for London and UK. Edited for spelling

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They just had ken on Newsnight ....I'd forgotten > quite what an odious man he is Altho' in his brief stint on the show he managed to create an internal Labour party argument, try to smear his opponent and other prominent politicians and generally reinforce his "odiousosity".

DC - do you really believe those statistics? I work in healthcare - the waiting list time in '95 was significantly less than 18 months, the real waiting list nowadays is far more than 18 weeks. The despair in the NHS at the last 12 years obsession with targets and the current centralist, Stalinist, control from the Department of Health is palpable. With a few, very few, exceptions the majority of NHS hospitals are under pressure and struggling to finance services and staffing. The existing model of care and funding in the NHS has pertained for 60 years. It was in need of serious thought and overhaul in '97 but the Tory government did not have the mandate to do so, although its earlier reforms were successful in developing a degree of independence and improved quality of services. The incoming Labour government did have a mandate and, as the self proclaimed champions of the NHS, the goodwill of NHS staff and its stakeholders. It fudged the opportunity, overturning and then re-inventing Tory NHS policies, increasing staff costs without reform of structure or process and setting a ridiculous micro-managed target setting culture. On Education - again the statistics are skewed and do not represent reality. Talk to any parent - it is almost impossible to get a place in a decent primary school around here - and the ambition to get to a "good" school is a measure of how very poor the vast range of primary schools are. The same applies to secondary schools but with the added problem that few, if any, of the local state schools are up to snuff. Since '97 the Labour government has been riven with internal leadership battles - mostly behind the scenes until 2001, but there - draining energy and focus from the task of government. This current administration - which still has a majority of over 100 - is unable to demonstrate credible leadership or even, it seems, bring together a half way decent Cabinet. I will not comment on Labour's failed stewardship of the economy with the destruction of UK's pensions, the increase in taxes by stealth or the financial illiteracy of claiming and end to boom and bust. Anyone who seeks to defend this government on its performance or claim that there is not a crying need for change is guilty of selective memory. The only Labour policy of the last 12 years I can wholeheartedly (and selfishly) support is the banning of smoking in public places (and the Libertarian conscience in me is still not entirely happy with government control of individual choice)

I tramped the streets leafleting and talking - this Labour gov't was voted in on a wave of goodwill which it has totally squandered. The NHS has not ben transformed and now cost three times as much, ditto for education with a poi tless expansion of tertiary education. PinkyB has said that the Tories took us into two wars - the Falklands and the first Iraq war were both justified and proportionate. This government has involved the country in more wars, using fudged evidence and reducing, in real terms, the Defence budget. It is time for a change - and the only viable alternative is a Tory government

3 to 1 on an election before end November

D-Day. Anthony Beevor. Tough reading, particularly recognizing that so many of the frontline troops were no older than my teenage son currently working his way around Europe.

Buff & polish does it for me.

I would suggest that all Labour Politicians are experiencing cognitive dissonance - the holding of two totally contradictory ideas at once. They believe that they have the right and ability to be in power and wine the next election - but at the same time they hear everyone else rubbishing this idea and telling them that they're on the way out.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ouch! Done before in 1936 - the dead sparrow (and the offending ball) is now in the Lord's Cricket museum.

As Hugenot says - it was a long and vicious little war. No honour or glory on either side. For the Tamil protesters to expect immediate magnanimity, harmony and aid from the victors is unrealistic. Protest is certainly a right - but it does have responsibilities. It should be proportionate to the scale of the problem and the likelihood of the protest having an impact. I would suggest that: a. The war is over, the scale of the problem, while significant, is reducing and the situation is improving. Not as fast as many would wish but the protesters aim of publicity has been met, diplomatic action (both formal and less overt) has and continues to be taken, the UN is involved (albeit they have voted in favour of Sri Lanka's motion), humanitarian aid is beginning to flow. b. The likelihood of the UK Parliament and its members making any significant positive change for the better is minimal. Therefore the protest should be reduced to a token minimum - that continues to publicise the Tamil's concerns but does not create disruption and chaos.

It is also a rather strange concept that by protesting in a foreign country - and one that has no particular economic or diplomatic sway with the government of Sri Lanka - the Tamils hope to somehow improve the lot of their colleagues, comrades and families in Sri Lanka. If I were to picket Nottingham council offices in a protest about Southwark Council I'd be thought foolish .

I'm a sceptic and have posted to say so before. I am only going to post this one time - because the EDF debate will, in all probability, go nowhere. While scientists arguing in favour of the climate change model are in the majority - that, of itself, does not indicate unanimity and many of their reports are hedged with more "possibles", likely", "most" etc. Once it was "Global Warming" now it's "Climate Change" as, inconveniently, the actual increase in global temperatures isn't matching the predicted increase of the climate models. However, sceptic or fan of the concept what troubles many of the "deniers" is the vociferous and (I've used this term before - to Sean McG's disgust) almost evangelical nature of the many supporters - whose invariably unscientific approach seems to be unconcerned with facts, the possibility of technology developing solutions and particularly doom laden; many seem more concerned with the creation of costly and inefficient "green" solutions - such as high carbon, intermittent and inefficient windfarms. jctg's first para of the first post is polemic not argument and an example of much of the level of debate - not a single fact is presented to support the case. The second paragraph is, slightly, more sensible in drawing upon the scientific community's consensus - but ignores that scientific research is subject to fads, fancies and current enthusiasms - as a result the work can become skewed. For example - if you are a research scientist seeking funds - which area is likely to be in line with current concerns and thus granted funds - "The Consequences of Climate Change" or "How the current change to climate patterns is associated with sunspot cycles" - I suspect the former will garner more funding.

When does a legitimate protest become too much. I have been following the end of the Tamil Tiger's campaign in Sri Lanka and the associated claims and counter claims about war crimes, atrocities and so on. I haven't been following the protests in Parliament Square so much. I support the right to protest absolutely. However, after 9 weeks of protest it is difficult to balance the daily disruption against the likelihood of the protest achieving anything tangible. It's a difficult balance to strike but I believe that the protest should be contained to allow normal activities to carry on. Reducing the numbers, constraining the area, time limiting the protest are all options. Any other ideas / views?

Coupe of points: 1. Isn't voting compulsory in Australia? 2. I'm very strongly against lowering the voting age to 16 - if anything I'd prefer to raise the voting age to 25, make it compulsory to vote (but include a "none of the above" category) and insist that MPs cannot stand for election until the age of 30 and a job "outside" of politics (so no more University Union - House of Commons researcher - think tank wonk - MP route into politics)

The problem with the Blackbird bakery is that they simply do not have sufficient bread/sandwiches available ................... Very strange way to run a business. I don't know. If they can sell all they produce and make a profit why risk making more and having stock left over? They do have another outlet - it may be a capacity issue at the bakery - perhaps there's a limit to the amount of good loaves of bread they can make in a day? I'd prefer a small run of excellent quality to a longer run of poorer quality.

My son was at the Lido this weekend - it was mobbed as you'd expect. However, the strange thing is that the excellent cafe that used to be there has gone. Asking the manager the story is, apparently, that they're looking for a suitable caterer to take over the franchise but, so far, haven't found the right one. Seems like a good opportunity for budding caterers out there? East Dulwich Deli / Luca's / Blackbird Bakery / Herne Tavern / Petit Chou / Green & Blue - all provide good grub at different price levels. Any one could probably make a good go of it.

Not a scientist but ...... here goes. 1. All colour is a function of light. 2. Light can be refracted to create a spectrum of colours 3. That spectrum of colours provides every combination of colour that can ever be created - tho' some may not be present in any other form than the spectrum of light. 4. So YES nature got there first. Doesn't the New Scientist have a question and answer column that could answer this?

beef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > http://no2eu.com/ > > I would paste links to the other party's sites for > the sake of impartiality, but this is the only one > one needs to visit. This party is just Socialist Worker dross dressed up under a fancy name to win some EU funding and expenses. Any party that includes Bob Crow as a candidate clearly has problems - he is an unreconstructed left wing militant who believes that ever higher pay and better conditions for his, already pampered staff, are more important than providing a service to the paying public. Tube Strike

BBW - and this is what HMS Diomede looks like through that periscope - when passing the escorts to attack the heavy unit.