Loz

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Blah Blah Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > One of our big six energy compainies is EDF > > which is a STATE owned utility company of > France. > > > > > Imagine that! A state owned company that > trades > > globally making profit for it's own state. > > > > A slight point of order in that 15% of the EDF > > parent company is privately owned. > > Haven't read the thread but by heck I didn't > realise the forum was so big. ...or owned mostly by the French, for that matter!

Saffron Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ok, interesting -- my initial complaint was to > TFL, who then referred us to Abellio. So, who > ultimately holds responsibility? I guess it depends on if Abellio has to report the result of the enquiry back to TFL. Maybe get in touch with London Travelwatch (http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/).

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If the Labour Party has any aspirations to govern again, they need to throw > Corbyn under the proverbial bus. Today. To give the Parliamentary Labour Party their due, they are trying to...

I don't think you can hit Abellio with an FOI, as they are not a public body. You can go after TFL, though. Likewise, there is nothing in the DPA to prevent them giving you the details of the result of your incident. Actually, you could probably do a DPA hit on them - known as a Subject Access Request - requesting all information they have on you (in particular, the specified incident, including the CCTV) for the princely sum of ?10. https://www.gov.uk/request-cctv-footage-of-yourself

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jeremy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Could a Corbyn victory help to revitalise the Lib Dems? > > > I was wondering the same thing. Could imagine some Labour guys switching teams. I thought that as well. I can see the Blairites and other centre-lefters merging with the Lib Dems.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One of our big six energy compainies is EDF which is a STATE owned utility company of France. > Imagine that! A state owned company that trades globally making profit for it's own state. A slight point of order in that 15% of the EDF parent company is privately owned.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Labour spilt is obvious, between those who have given up on their traditional working class ground support > and think they need to become more 'Tory' if they want to win an election, and those who want to get those seats > back in Scotland and get back those votes lost to UKIP etc. I think the former is lazy and the latter will require > real work towards a change of collective consiousness. I don't care if Corbyn loses the next General Election > if the alternative is a Labour government that mirrors the the Tory party in all but name. I agree that the current Labour party are way too close to the Tories, but moving too far too fast will only scare the horses and leave Labour in opposition not just for an election, but possibly for a generation. You can effect change if and only if you are in government. It would be much better to find a solid centre-left person, but of the current leadership contenders, no one really fits the bill like Andy Burnham did last time around - before he started to move wherever the wind blows. Three of the leadership hopefuls offer credibility. One offers something different. The problem is that Labour needs to offer something different AND something credible. > That's what America has for a politcal system and we all know how poor that is. Sort of. It always amuses me when people say how terribly right-wing the Tories are, but then big-up the even more right-wing Democrats. If just about any Democrat HoR or senate member moved to the UK, I know which party they would join. But the Republicans? They are complete right-wing nutters. I look at all their hopefuls and I can barely see a sane one amongst them.

On the other hand, most of Corbyn's economic policy has been formulated by former accountant and now professional random number generator, Richard Murphy. Utterly clueless. Corbyn would be the perfect MP. He works hard for his constituents and is very genuine. I just think he would be a ideological disaster as PM. I don't think that will happen, but he may just destroy the Labour Party along the way. It says a lot that he has very little support amongst MPs - to the point that he only got on the ballot paper with what was either some sort of bizarre sympathy vote or an attempt to look inclusive and chuck a real lefty in.

Don't worry. The lounge just found God.

Use a site like Rightmove, plug in "London" and your budget and it will show you where to look. E.g. I did a search on London, 3+ bed and budget of 200-300k and found 163 properties, mostly east London, Brent Cross/Edgware and down towards Croydon.

Corbyn would be a disaster for the Labour party. Labour needs a strong leader that can take them back to a centre-left position. Corbyn is not that leader. The Tories need an effective opposition to keep them honest and he's not the person to do it. Cameron will eat him for breakfast. Mind you Harman has been singularly ineffectual of late. I don't like her as a person, but I do respect her as a politician and she's been weirdly meek (and weak) in this term as stand-in leader. Out of the rest, Burnham seems to have turned into a "what to you want me to believe today" candidate, which is disappointing as last time around he seemed to be the candidate with the most solid principles. Liz Kendall is too centre-right for Labour. Cooper is probably their best bet for an election-winner, but she's a bit tainted by the ghost of Balls.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Unbelievable.....anyone seen Loz? "I'm sorry but Loz is unavailable right now. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you in about 18 months time. BEEP."

Yeah, yeah. Just because you rode your first bus in a decade today *Bob*...

I understand Virgin is the only company that will do you broadband without a landline. Mainly as all the rest use the copper that you'll only have if you have a BT line. And though I didn't ever actually buy one, when I looked into PVRs last year I came to the conclusion that the best PVRs are made by Humax.

rfolgado Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz - do your parents know you're playing on the Internet? You're just sore because you live in a dumpy area of London.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its certainly much better than East Dulwich transport links... Eh? Where I lived, it was also a 10 minute walk (less by bus) from Denmark Hill. Plus had ED station even closer. Plus the 185, 40 and 176 buses. I think that rather counts as better.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We can even test that here. How many people who cycle can remember when they > went from stabilisers to two wheels? How hard was it? Well, it was a very (very, very) long time ago, but IIRC it was over the course of a couple of weeks. Dad took the stabilisers up a notch every few days until I no longer used them at all, before removing them altogether. Mind you, I was only 4 or 5 (rather than your kid's 6/7) at the time, but I'd still be very surprised if a kid could go from first time on a bike to no stabilisers in 5 mins. > It's the same for many things, like skiing and swimming for example. All easier to pick up in childhood. I've taught many kids to ski, and it really depends on the kid in question. I've had some up and skiing blue level in a day or so and red by the end of the week. Others have had me beating my head on the magic carpet controls still on the nursery slope five days later. I imagine cycling is not dissimilar.

Those 'lets make up a figure to call a cost benefit' studies are always dubious, to say the least (not picking on cycling ones here, any of them). For instance, how can you possibly say that "Reduced noise pollution" is worth EUR300m of benefit to the economy?? How? It's all a nonsense.

If you didn't catch it the first time, ITV is showing the Sheridan Smith biopic/mini-series again. Worth a watch, even if Smith rather outsings Cilla.

yourmomma Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not that safe.. > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31431596 > http://news.sky.com/story/1494560/british-tank-flattens-learner-drivers-car Ah, but they weren't *Panzer* tanks. It makes all the difference, you know.

MissMadMoo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Motor vehicle and cycle involvement in pedestrian > fatal and serious injuries, annual > average 2009-13 in URBAN areas (excluding > motorways: > > % of pedestrians killed > By Car 99.2 > By Idiot cyclist 0.82 > > Evil naughty cyclist, ban them all i say! What percentage of traffic do 'cars' make up? Did you know that between 2009-2013 zero pedestrians were killed on UK roads by Panzer tanks? They must be the safest form of transport, then.

No, he's not.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Get a new cleaner. I wouldn't even bother having > a word with her as if you can't trust your > cleaner, you really don't want them in your house. Agreed. The thought of a pissed-off cleaner let loose in your house doesn't bear thinking about.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is all starting to sound like the modern day > equivalent of the old car/penis size theorem. > Quite happy with my 26''er... Yeah, everyone with a small telly says that. :D

Now flexible, thin LEDs are coming to fruition I reckon we're not to far from the day when, instead of a 'feature wall', we'll have a 'telly wall'.