DJKillaQueen

Are you sure BB it wasn't just the BAFTA rep pitching a script ides to Holt? ;-)

What I find works, is to work out how long you 'think' it'll take you to get somewhere...and then add a third onto it. That works for me.

There's nothing wrong with posters advertising fundraising......that's not intrusive and that for me is a right way to raise awareness. Even if one person feels uncomfortable at receiving a letter after being a patient that is something that should be looked at. And unless the patient has been asked to tick a box saying they DON'T want to receive non treatment related mail then they haven't opted out of anything. I find it hard to understand why anyone can't see that would a reasonable solution to preventing those (however many or few they may be) from being affected by such a letter. It's important to remember that one of the key points in this discussion is the proximity of the letter to treatment. If you receive treatment and then a few days or weeks later get a letter about fundraising then the intent is clear. I know that the letter is not a direct request for donations, but there is a marketting reason as to why the letters are sent to recent patients. There WILL be people who can't afford it but will feel obliged to donate or be left feeling they should be able to and my concern particularly is for the vulnerable, such as the elderly or those with mental health problems, who may well be left confused or upset. After all we have processes in place for so many other things to protect the few. Giving patients the option to opt out of direct mail/ marketting would simply be another one of those processes.

That's an interesting system. I particularly like the being able to sue children bit. Yes LM I did mean that if there are no jobs out there, no amount of policy towards the unemployed is going to change that we need to pay benefits. For me benefit reform and investment in jobs go hand in hand. One without the other is pointless.

Did anyone try the draught ciders? Looking forward to going there soon with my (footy) gals.....

Take a moment folks to remember what the core issue of this discussion really is. No-one is saying that fund raising is a bad thing...nor are they saying that Kings shouldn't be doing it. The question is simply a point of process. Should patient information be 'processed' for use for direct mail in relation to (in this case) fundraising aspects of Kings, and within a relatively short period following treatment? Some people think not. They find it intrusive and inappropriate given that they have recently received treatment. It's a valid viewpoint to have and one that should be respected. Others feel the opposite way and are more than happy to receive this mail. The law does require all bodies that use data, to register for what uses data is processed. In Canada and the US....hospital charities are allowed to direct mail patients but all patients are given the option to opt out at time of treatment from such targetting. I can't see why a similar system shouldn't be considered here, so that those that don't want to receive direct mail, won't. After all just because someone has benefitted from treatment doesn't mean they should be forced to receive unrelated mail if they don't want it. It's seems to me to be the sensible solution to the opposing arguments.

As long as it has a crossword and a TV guide for the week I'll buy it..... If not can I have someone else's when they've finished with it? :)

Err I think Muslim imans do get equally criticised when they have equally controversial baggage attached to them. The difference is that we don't spend ?20m on bringing them here to visit us.

Ha Ha.....very good lol.

Just watched the news...nearly choked when the Pope said that secularism and atheist extremism (whatever that is) were bad for mankind (or words to that effect). Reminded of me when I was 17 and the bishop of Liverpool came to speak to my sixth form. He said that those without faith couldn't have any morality. I stood up and shouted BS accross the room...and then recounted everything bad (since as far back as my knowledge of history would allow at that time) bad in the name of religion, finishing with Northern Ireland, as it was the 80's. 'Is that what you mean by morality' I asked. The headmistress hung her head in embarassment.....and the bishop? Well let's just say he wasn't expecting that.

The 9 million figure refers to those not actively in employment for whatever reason (between 16-64) so from an analysts point of view that is the number of jobs needed for full employment (so that there is little or no welfare drain on the economy). Of course the sick and disabled will never be able to work. Even if you take away students (who need jobs eventually) and the genuinely incapacitated, you are still left with a vacancy vs unemployed gap that means you will never get the majority of the unemployed back into work - unless something radical is done to create jobs, and esp in those areas where unemployment is highest. At worst, we need around 3 million jobs (for the unemployed and for those on incap that are no longer genuinely too ill to work).....we've needed those levels of job creation for almost three decades....and esp in those areas with high unemployment, like the North. My point about the work shy is this. If you are an employer, and you have (just taking the JSA figure of 2.27 million) at least a ratio of 5:1 applying for any job you advertise (in reality employers receive far more applications)....you are not going to take the applicant that has never worked, or been LTU, or over a certain age and so on, when you have the pick of younger recently unemployed people to chose from. That is the reality. And that's why sucessive governments have consistently failed to tackle LTU. So to me there's no point in demonising benefit recipients if you then can't do something to show that forcing them to look for work makes a difference. I think there would be far more sense in having a policy where those that have never worked or are LTU, after a certain time, are made to work for their benefits (equivalent to the value of their benefits - and in line with average wage levels for the type of service they do). For many recipients that would equate to 3-5 hours a day maybe.....doing something that the local area needs, in a voluntary capacity. That would also benefit the country to use the skills that many of the LTU have (because many of them do have skills). Of course the danger always is that it takes away real jobs but it can be done in a way that safeguards from that. That seems to me a far better approach to getting them used to having to be somewhere every day, and to turning them into productive members of society. It wouldn't be much to ask...still leaving plenty of time for those who are genuinely looking for work to do so, whilst also not impeding on those who have children. The government would have to spend a sizeable amount of money to put that into place, but I think it's money worth spending if it changes the work ethic of those (however many they might be) who genuinely can't be bothered. And similarly, for those that won't play ball....switch them from a cash payment to vouchers. I think the restriction of freedom on how they spend their benefits (through vouchers) would be a more effective way of getting the truly lazy to play ball. Suspension of benefits never works because the claimant appeals and gets the money they are due in the end anyway. Legally it very difficult to take base benefit away from a claimant, because the base level of what a person needs to live on is set in law, so all the threats to take away benefits (which sound great in the media) mean very little in reality.

I completely agree Jah. Your post very succinctly demonstrates just what the discussion should be about. And sometimes it takes illustrations (even ironic, close to the bone ones) to get people to discuss the real issue.

I can give one example of something bus companies do. On days they have a driver shortage (say drivers are off sick - without prior notice) the company can't suddenly produce drivers so they'll keep the more popular and profitable routes running to timetable and remove buses from the smaller less profitable routes. I would suspect that the gaps in sevice on the 484 and P13 etc are usually the result of driver shortages on any given day/ shift. My father worked for a bus company for 25 years and this was commonly what happened.

Of course there will always be things that screw up timetables but even still it should be possible to have a consistent service most of the time (that's why we have bus lanes for example). Most bus companies employ timetable inspectors (monitoring drivers and buses) to do that. It seems the grumbles are about those services that use the smaller 'hopper' buses and it may well be that the bus companies don't put as much effort into monitoring/ maintaining them - that's possible isn't it?

If a bus company publishes a timetable for a service....then they should be able to provide that service most of the time. I think it's perfectly fair to demand that from the bus company. Also, for the elderly, disabled etc, their only option often is the nearest bus stop and services that run from it. They can't walk a half mile to take another route.

This is what southwark's own site says about the cycle contraflow.... So last year, Southwark Council decided to carry out consultation with local and business communities, working with partners Transport for London and the London Cycle Network, to establish what improvements were needed to be built. Ben Plowden, Director of Better Routes and Places at Transport for London, said: "The improved Rye Lane will significantly improve the environment in the town centre as well as create a safe and pleasant walking and cycling environment. "With many people taking to two wheels and walking for shorter journeys, it is important to invest in facilities that promote cycling and walking. Improving streets and shared spaces is at the heart of the Mayor of London's agenda and TfL is pleased to be funding projects such as Rye Lane that directly support the Mayor's Transport Strategy." The new cycle contra flow track will greatly enhance connectivity for cyclists in Peckham and those travelling from Burgess Park towards Rye Lane via the local Surrey Canal path. Read the whole article here Make what you will of the 'consultation' but the reference to 'improved' safetly for cyclists and pedestrians is mystifying. I was knocked off my cycle twice last week by predestrians that strayed into the 'pavement' cycle lane with no time for me to react. Prior to the contraflow scheme I never had a collision with a pedestrian in twenty years of cycling. I now avoid it as a route.

Generally speaking I don't find the bus services too bad (and remember the days when the 37 seemed more like a rumour than an actual service).....but I too have on occasion found the 484 wanting. Usually because a bus hasn't come along for a while and so the next one that does, is packed and doesn't stop.

Latest figures from the Office for National Statistics state that; The inactivity rate for those aged 16-64 (i.e. taking no part in active employment) as of July 2010 is 9.26 million This can be partly explained as: Those in receipt of unemployment benefit 2.47 million Those in receipt of sickness and disability benefits 2.7 million* Students 2.9 million The rest may be all or partly accounted for by those working in the black economy (impossible to know how many), those either forced into or voluntarily in early retirement and around 280,000 full time carers. The number of vacancies is shown as 467,000. Add to that 7.93 million workers are part time (some of which require benefits to supplement their income). So clearly you are never going to get work shy or unskilled people into work whilst employers have the pick of such a large pool of jobseekers. Governments have tried and failed on this for three decades. They all talk tough but the reality is that there just aren't anything like the jobs needed to achieve what the government and public wants and we can expect employment to rise by 600,000 ? over 1 million as public sector cuts kick in, over coming years as well. *this figure comes from the DWP

Are they not unlike some door to door salesmen in that respect...cold calling and pouncing on any kind of inability to tell them to get lost? And yes H is right.....it's the complete unnacceptance of any perspective other than their own that some find most offensive....at least door to door con men know they are preying on people.

I agree that the historical legacy of Catholicism is one that it finds hard to shake off and the same can be found for other religions in areas where they have dominated local culture historically. But this Pope has said things that are just hard for any decent person to have any respect for....and it's hard to know just how many Catholics then adopt the views he preaches (obviously not all of them).

I sometimes stop at a green light and wait for it to go red so that I can get into position (rather than risking my life).....and I agree with Medley on the Rye lane contraflow thing.

People have always moved to find what they can afford. And within a city it's no big deal a think. Rural areas though are where I think your question might apply best....where young people can not afford to buy anything in their home town....but having said that, the city I grew up in has been in decline since the 50's and the population has shrunk by a third in that time. People have moved out to find jobs.....leaving plenty of empty and possibly affordable homes behind.

We need around 9 million jobs to fully employ the unemployed....... In Sheffield you only have a 1 in 8 chance of finding a job if you are unemployed. That is a fact that no level of demonising the unemployed is going to change.

What an intelligent response katie zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

I would suggest putting a 'pink night at the victoria inn' (or whatever title works) in the what's on section with a date, to gauge interest.....and then those of us with mailing lists etc can spread the word......