Earl Aelfheah

I had exactly the same problem. Got an HD Freesat Recorder (so kind of like sky plus). It's a good option. You can also rig it up to recieve BBC iPlayer, which I haven't done yet, but will be doing soon.

My baby had a small fall (a bit of a faceplant whilst crawling). Later we noticed a small red mark on her lip, which we put down to the fall (as she has a number of new teeth). It's now a day later and the red mark has developed into what looks like a cold sore. I'm a bit worried about this as I understand that this can be fairly serious for little ones (she's 11 months). How can I tell if it's just a small cut that's gone 'manky', or an actual cold sore? I will take her to the doctors tomorrow and get theri advice, but if anyones had similar problems with their little one, I would love to hear your view? Thanks

I'm hoping for something really edgy and cutting edge. Maybe even experimental / avant garde. a Fat Face prehaps?

If dogs can play poker, I do not see why they cannot use a toilet.

Please can we call a moratorium on the use of the phrase 'yummy mummy'.

Camden = 7 gabillion goths - read some Robert Smith

Take6? Is this a chain? I've not heard of it?

Let's have late licences, but only where a bar is worth spending the extra time in. Adventure bar (who decided that was a good name?) is really very unimaginative. Bring back Inside 72 and let it stay open all night!

My issue with 'Adventure bar' (jeez, I cringe just typing that name) and 'boho bar' (not much better), are not their late licences, but their sheer naffness.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > nashoi, > > His figures came up with a net gain to > the govt, for a person earning ?25K, of ?9140. > You need to add in the salary (?25K) though you > can probably leave out NI, etc, as these go back > to the government and nets itself out, but you > need to add in 17% (?4250) for public sector > pension costs. > > So, to employ someone in government has a net cost > of ?21110. This does not factor in costs for > buildings, lighting, heating, support services (ie > HR departments), computer licensing, etc, etc, but > those are difficult to quantify on the back of a > fag packet. > > According to the article, an unemployed person has > a net costs to the government of ?12160 (this does > not include any redundancy payments, which could > be up to 2x salary in the PS). This cost would > hopefully be temporary, though in a recession that > may not be the case especially as most public > sector workers usually jump from one PS job to > another. An employment freeze would stop this and > force them out to seek work in the private sector > - which is the general idea, but may take time. > > Not an exhaustive analysis, by any means. You also have to look at the knock on cost to private sector growth. Public sector workers spend the money they earn on goods and services which generally boost the economy. Also, much of the work they do (which involves infrastructure, educatoin, health etc), does create wealth (it's not valueless work, despite what some would have you believe). This is why it is often better to employ someone inefficiently in the public sector, than pay for them not to work at all. To work out how you balance it all, is exteremly difficult.

In theory, it probably consitutes indirect discrimination, which is unlawful. However, in reality one would have difficultly making a claim. Pretty poor practice though and unlikely to ensure that you're employing the best person for the job. Goes on all over the place unfortunately, especially in the media (which I guess explains T4 presenters).

Anyone got an update on the progress of this (I think the planning decisions have been made now)?

Get some inebriated students to wear them home as hats - they love such capers I am told. I'm sure 'hardman' doesn't like students much (hardmen don't you know). He will be happy as it will have confirmed everything that he thought about students, and you'll be in the clear.

There is a permabark dog on Rodwell Road (possibly Heber). I'm considering canineacide.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Attached is bus route 12 consultation letter. > What do you think? > > From November 2011 the bendy buses on bus route 12 > will be changed to normal double deckers. This > will make the lives of those on Etherow Street far > more bearable and something we've campaigned on. > Fantastic. I won't travel on bendy buses, so this will open up a whole new route to me. > To compensate for smaller passenger loads per bus > more buses will run. So overall slightly better > frequency. Equally bendy buses have a reputation > as ?free buses? so capacity can be marginally > reduced as you can?t get on a normal double decker > without paying. > > Only caveat I have is that countdown real time bus > information wont be isntalled at all bus stops. > Waiting around for 30 minutes at nighttime is bad > enough but not having information if a bus is > cancelled could see a wait of upto 90minutes. > Having information means passengers can change > their plans.

I ended up moving out of Camberwell because of a group of youths (who used to hang out in the (private) carpark which belonged to my block of flats) and regularly behaved in much this manner. Southwark Antisocial Behaviour Unit were absolutely useless and after a couple of years of it, we just decided to move. There is so little you can do (unless you take matters into your own hands - which I did consider at one point). I really feel for you. It's uneccesary and unpleasant. Don't let it play on your mind, and despite what i've said, do report it. I hope they abuse the wrong person next time and get what's coming to them.

I used to cycle 7 miles (one way) to school, from the age of 11, with a group of friends. No harm ever came to us, probably the biggest effect was that we were fitter, happier and more conifident. I don't believe that things are more dangerous today. I do believe that people are absolutely paralysed by fear of crime. Anyway, what really upsets me about this story is the role of other parents and social services. Firstly, what business is it of other parents at the school? You could argue that actually driving your children to the school gate is far more antisocial and therefore more of a matter for other parents to question your choices over.

Anyone have a photo they can post?

My friends who live in Tooting haven't been offered the BCG for their child, which seems wierd as they go to all the same baby groups.

http://www.money.co.uk/article/1002877-bank-bailout-to-add-up-to-1-5-trillion-to-public-debt.htm

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I understand the need to not spend public money > that does not exist. (As much as I understand the > stupidity in banks being allowed to lend money > they don?t have and then claiming the debt as an > asset along with all the other contrived ways of > magicing money from nowhere that they have) > > What worries me is the knock on effect of large > scale redundancies on the economy. It is all well > and good saving X billion ? by sacking 100 > thousand people but you?ve only saved the money > that those people weren?t paying back to you in > tax anyway which could be 50% and above, then they > are going to claim benefits, they may require > housing, they are going to stop contributing to > commerce by buying cars and video games and pooper > scoopers and borrowing money from banks, they > aren?t going to use private healthcare or > education etc etc. > > So there must be a tipping point where it causes > more damage than it solves. You are absolutely correct. Government debt also re-emerges into the economy and stimilutes private sector business. The government have done nothing to prevent any repeat of the credit crunch. A proportionate response to the irresponsibility of the City, which largely got us into our current mess, would not lead to the collapse of our economy - in fact quite the reverse is true. There is definitely an ideological element to the current government's approach to reducing the deficit, which is simply opportunism. We do of course need a reduction in the deficit - there is no doubt about this. But so much of the response is not logical, but political. Why are we ring fencing the NHS for example. It was by far the biggest recipient of Labour's largesse. Billions was poured into feather bedding consultant doctors. Even more was lost, employing useless (private sector) management consultants, failed IT projects etc. It's the worst type of populurism to ring fence health. To suggest that banks have played no part in the current deficit problem is nonsence. The reduction in tax recipts is down to the recession, which is largely a result of the credit crunch. Billions upon billions have now been poured into the banks, which leaves an even bigger hole in the public finances. And yet the government will not take action to curtail even the most extreme antisocial and irresponsible practices of bankers.

I've just googled it and it seems that the vaccination is offered in a number of Boroughs (not what I'd heard talking to people). Can't actually find out exactly where it is and isn't offered though. I'm still unsure how necessary it is. Any opinions (especially medics out there), apprecitated.

Everyone I know who started out with a Bugaboo, or other, similar 'big' buggy has ended up getting a MacLaren. They're just much more practical - smaller, lighter etc. Unless you're really into cross country buggying, I would opt for the MacLaren Techno.

My 9 month old daughter is due to recieve her BCG vacination. I remember having my BCG at school and it was very painful. I understand that they only administer this vaccination within two or three London Boroughs and that if we lived a couple of miles to the west, she wouldn't be getting offered it. Is it really necessary? Any views / insights appreciated.

We have a huge deficit problem. Part of this is down to our having bailed out the banks with public money. Banking is now a hugely subsidised industry. The big banks are once again paying out huge bonuses. The government seems to be doing virtually nothing to start clawing back the billions in public money that was sunk into these organisations. Cameron paints a picture of the 'hard done by' private sector, talking of "public sector boom ? and a private sector bust". There are huge cuts coming to the public sector. Anyone who believes that this won't mean the loss of real jobs and a reduction in front line services is in my opinion, mistaken. We are going to see public money funding city bonuses, whilst doctors, nurses and police are made redundant. Why are the public accepting this. Have we forgotten the role bankers played in the recession? Where is the response from government which we were promised? Is it just me, or does this all seem quite unbelievable?