malumbu

Not probably, but facts. Human rights has some element of subjectivity but you would be pretty hard pressed to conclude otherwise. Holding the tournament ligitimises the regime. Money is nothing, Surely that is pretty obvious? You'd be hard pressed to find good reasons why it is in Qatar. Good on Peter Reid for his support of opposition to the Iraqui regime. I wonder what Judas David Beckham thinks of this.

Am indigenous population of 300k, dwarfed by ten times more migrant workers/expats. Fourth highest GDP in the world. Third largest natural gas reserves. The world's highest CO2 emissions per capita. Do you think they care a diddly squat about human rights and the environment? And the west probably needs them more than they need to west. Whole situation is and was a farce.

Haven't posted for some time, so a few observations. Feral pigeons have ousted the resident wood pigeons, the latter were a nusance but the rats with feathers are not welcome. They sit under the sunflower seed feeder and pick up the fragments dropped by the gold finches. I've lashed a squirel proof cage from another feeder, so the paraquets can't feed from it and fashioned a deep tray from a rubber thing that stretches over food containers. Great when it is dry but when it is wet I get this sunflower seed porridge - which I still dry out and reuse. I go through over a £100 worth of sunflower seeds so don't want to spend a quarter of that feeding feathered rats. I've lost most of my frogs from my pond and similarly not seen any newts for ages but expect they will be back. Tadpoles failed again, I left some in the pond which the newts ate, and had a nursury in an old wheelbarrow. They got to back legs and then were eaten, by birds I expect. Pond flora generally good, and I use excess to try to better manage a local pond which the authorities don't look after and is generally full of pond weed. I'm not saying where it is as some will be unhappy that I am moving tranferring from another pond. Mine is in better condition so I am not worried about cross contamination. Cheeky long tailed tits are back, which is nice.

Oh name please, appropriate on this occasion!

Two Chinese supermarkets in Peckham. Khan's store in Peckham is ginormous and had eclectic stock including south Asian.

Returning to Sparticus's post, I watched the BBC article. Action is being taken by the regulators OFGEM, so the system is working. Reading my subtext the energy market should never have been privitised in the first place. In principle smart meters are a good thing if they allow consumers to reduce energy costs. The points on storing energy and selling it back to the grid are not so far fetched as getting on for 20% of new car sales have a large battery that can be used in this way. OK not mass take up yet, and certainly not those on limited budgets.

You are covering multiple issues, including whether we should have charities in the first place. Personally it should not be for individuals to support hospitals, hospices, social care, overseas aid, schools etc, and even veterens, that is for the state. You can argue otherwise for say animal welfare. But no point in being purist on this, and we need the McMillans and St Christophers of this world. As for donations, Oxfam still have a vital role irrespective of recent serious issues. I would donate at Xmas to them, but it is easier to send gifts to my wider family using WWF. As for shops I don't understand your problem when you have St Christophers and Mind in East Dulwich

Surely charging more at periods of high demand is how markets work. Conversely those boxing a bit clever will save money buying their energy during lower demand. The real savvy ones will store energy in their battery backs, domestic (as some using PV already do) and/or in their electric vehicle (v2g). I'm using abbreviations to show how well informed I am. Or just a show off (a polite description). Alternatively we should have never privatised energy markets in the first place, And we'd not have a problem as the Thatcher government had built a number of nuclear reactors. As they had planned to do from the late 80s

Think that this should go in the main ED section. Considering the outrage expressed by some of you perhaps we could also change the borough boundary so you join us in Lewisham. The only comparison I have is that you have much nicer pavements than ours, which are cracked, patched up and weeds growing in the gaps

Ed 26, glad you enjoyed the fireworks and good that you posted some positive views. Not saying there aren't adult conversations to be had, but (a) for a discussion forum you need both sides of the story, and (b) sometimes some views can appear a little reactionary. I'm trying to use soft terms as no value in winding people up (I'd normally use humour in this case). Usually worth hearing both sides of the argument

Ivy House. Upstairs at the Clock House.

As a kid we could buy fireworks at our corner shop. They sold them everwhere. Thousands got injured each bonfire night. Government clamped down banning some (eg jumping jacks and catherine wheels), increased the legal age for buying fireworks, and there seemed to be a move to organised events and a reduction in accidents. I'm not even sure where you buy them nowadays, supermarkets no longer. Yet for some reason there has been a rise in fireworks outside the organised events. Every year when I was young there would be public information campaigns about safe use - secure storage, responsible adult, light the blue touch paper and retire, don't go back to a firework when you think it has gone out. But that is nannying and governments don't tell us what to do anymore. Sadly it is more difficult to hold communuty events now due to insurance requirements. Not sure what the answer is.

I left a bike near Whitleys in Bayswater many years ago and went to the cinema. I came out two hours later to find I had not properly locked it to street furniture. It had fallen onto the pavement and people were politely walking round it. Obviously pleased it was not stolen but was I an early adopter of parking your bike on the pavement?

Simples. Produce hydrogen. Very much the fuel of the future.

About 18 years ago we went to an event at Crystal Palace, a celebration of something or other, with Capital Radio there. There was classical music, acrobatic dancers on a crane, all to the backdrop of some wonderful artistic fireworks..... without the bangs. So it can be done.

He should go, and it is sad if it is due to Johnson's presence. I hope he saw sense and is going for the right reasons. It would be interesting to hear what the Aussie's position is - green energy with all that sunshine exporting it where possible to the region is surely a win win. And of course Brazil

I commented earlier that scooters were more inherently dangerous than bikes. I forgot to add the further hazard that many e scooter riders have one hand on the bars and the other on their phone, and a slighly lower percentage of those on Lime bikes. So if you really want to channel your energies two issues you should ask your politicians about (a) cycling/scootering whilst on a mobile phone (b) cycling/ scootering on pavements This is not necessarily about enforcement, but can be hearts and minds. Government is doing neither but I can draw a parallel to an earlier campaign discouraging mobile use by pedestrians being on their phone whilst crossing the road. There was a graphic with a young person texting and then getting run over. And good on you for moving bikes on the pavement

Do any of you concerned about bikes being on the pavement actually move them ? Serious question. I'll post something less provocative later.

Cycling from Lordship Lane onto the South Circ an hour ago I just thought FFS. The board up from Thames Water suggesting they are improving the service, rather than patching up, takes the biscuit

Oh for goodness sake, just cut down on your motoring and use your car's smarter, and make the world a better place. You may already be doing that but it would help if all of us changed our views.

Scooters are more inherently dangerous than bikes, both standard and electronic versions. If you need to stop quickly on a bike you push your weight back. Having no saddle and a higher centre of gravity on a scooter means much more likely to go over your bars. Worse the faster you go. I don't see scooters and bikes being interchangable

Moving on, I like the tips on paint brushes. I invested in a roller holder/cover thing from Whites, great of you are spending a few days emulsioning.

Well I wont miss comments about what celebs are tweeting when I am watching something on the box or reading a BBC news article. Now as for what I think.....

So those between the North and South Circs and the M25 don't desere cleaner air?? Whilst some of the most polluted roads are in central London such as Marylebone/Euston Road, and slightly further out Brixton Road, pollution doesn't magically stop as soon as you hit Streatham. We've had a low emission zone for trucks and buses for many years now and that covers the whole of London within the M25. Older, more polluting petrol cars are allowed in the ULEZ as a compromise - you can't drive your 8 year old diesel but a 20 year old petrol that has gone twice round the clock is fine irrespective of the knackered engine. This was TfLs answer to complaints that those less well off would not be able to drive without a charge. The "money making scam" those of you in the tax payers alliance keep going on about will of course reduce as the car fleet turns over. For some it makes less and less sense to own a car and they will switch to public transport, activce travel or car clubs. Some may even decide to share journeys, this should be a public duty! Happy to answer further questions on pollution, ULEZ, car technology.

We are not all in agreement, but it is good debate, unlike 1000s of repetitive posts on the LTN and anything remotely connected to it!