LadyDeliah

Something to throw into the Harris debate: http://antiacademies.org.uk/2012/03/harris-federation-spotlight-on-sponsors/ Not entirely unbiased, but a lot of interesting stats, including executive pay of nearly ?250,000.

Excessive executive pay for charity execs: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2385120/Charity-bosses-earning-100-000-accused-excessive-pay-rises.html But charity executives say ?100,000 pa isn't excessive: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10225348/Executive-pay-at-charities-not-excessive-claims-industry.html

motorbird83 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Without waying into the broader debate, its > important to clairfy that charities are not > businesses. They do not make profits for their > owner. To the extent that revenue is higher than > expenses, the surplus has to be reinvested into > the charity to further its aims. By law, > surpluses cannot be distributed to those that > manage or established the charity. Except by way of executive pay perhaps.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > will let former citizens of the Soviet Union, it's > ex-sattelites, and the people of North Korea > know...... And this is just inane. What does the Soviet Union have to do with private corporations profiting from tax payers? There are more options than rampant corporate greed or stalinist, centrally controlled economies quids.

Meg1001 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > > > > > Well, yes, but the theory is that private > > enterprise efficiencies can do the job at less > > cost to the taxpayer and still turn a profit > for > > the companies involved. > > > > As an extreme example, the government could set > up > > a factory and make its own photocopiers. Or it > > can buy them cheaper from Xerox, save the > > taxpayers money and the company still make a > > healthy profit. > > > Will let Electricity/Gas/Water/Rail/Private > Landlords know... What's nonsensical about this? It's clear the privatised industries haven't reduced costs to the consumer. They have all used their monopolies to fleece us whilst still getting subsidies from the tax payer.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mr Sourface could have had an unseen disability Yeh, miserable-bastarditis.

Inquest on 2011 cyclist death. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cycle-death-inquest-boyfriend-hugs-driver-of-32-tonne-tipper-truck-that-killed-his-girlfriend-9016543.html Other vehicles in the advanced stop box and poor cycle provision contributed.

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blackcurrant Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > LadyDeliah Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > When I cycle, I'm lit up like a Christmas > tree > > but > > > I still have drivers, who clearly see me, > > pulling > > > out in front of me because they don't appear > to > > > think they should give priority to bikes as > > they > > > do to other vehicles. > > > > And there's nothing you can do about drivers > who > > are texting or fiddling with iPhone/satnav/mp3 > > player etc etc. > > Or cyclists who clearly think it's ok to hurtle > along a pavement when they should in the road > where traffic is supposed to be. You comment is relevant to my post, how exactly?

Got to highlight the rank hypocracy of people like Cameron bigging up Nelson Mandella after his previous invovlvement in the pro-apartheid movement and posters with 'Hang Mandella' on them. Good screen munch of a twitter convo here: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/file.php?20,file=116985

Must be my infantile, crass sense of humour then.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I realise you've got a boner for foxes, Foxy, but > this is the lounge, not the 'rigidly stick to > discussing foxes room'. > > If you want to discuss foxes and only foxes in a > rigid 'foxes only' fashion with like-minded > individuals, then I'm sure there are 'speciality > websites' out there somewhere for you. Nomination for post of the week. I snorted tea all over myself laughing.

James Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Called today and was told the wait for a > pre-booked is ONE MONTH! > > Sorry but this is just ridiculous. Yep, same here.

Eating slowly and sharing food doesn't mean they don't have an abundance of discarded food in London to feed on. Foxes in London are enormous compared to foxes in the country. They are clearly not hungry. Your motives for feeding them has nothing to do with their welfare.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I feed the foxes.. They are hungry. I doubt it, with the amount of food waste avaialble.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lady Delilah - a new car. Lol, I guessed someone might say that.

Compressed air & hammer: Let me know if it actually works.

I'll be there in spirit!

polla2256 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I did wonder what all the fuss was about as I > cycled past Denmark Hill station. :-)

Could commute by bike and avoid all these irritating delays :-)

I've always defended DMC but I've got to admit I have had enough recently too. I get a repeat prescription and have had it done through Boots in Peckham for about 2 1/2 years, but the last 8 months or so have been a total mess. DMC have failed every single time to send the prescription through to Boots and both myself and the Boots pharmacist have had to call DMC to have it faxed over. Then about 4 months ago I was told by DMC that they didn't have me on their system for repeats to Boots so I had to re-register on their system. I made a complaint to the practice manager and was assured that everything would be fine for the next prescription, due last week. I went to Boots on Thursday morning and there was no prescription. The pharmacist and I spent an hour on the phone, in the shop and I gave up because I had to get to Guy's for an operation by 12:30. The pharmacist tried to get through on the phone again on Friday and so did I from home, for hours. I was unable to get out of the house because of post-op pain etc so had to call the out of hours guys at SELDOC who gave me 3 days prescription. Couldn't get through on Saturday so Monday morning I dragged myself down to the surgery to find out what the hell was going on with them. I was told that they hadn't received the request from Boots, despite the fact I'd seen Boots fax it and saw the transmission receipt. They also said they were short staffed because a few people had left. In addition, their electronic prescription service thing wasn't working. I went to a more local Chemist to get my next prescription because I know they collect them by hand, rather than get them posted as per Boots. When I spoke to this pharmacist, he said DMC are really bad and they deliver their prescription requests by hand, get the DMC staff to sign for them and chase them up to make sure they are ready. I can't beleive how bad they have got in the last year. I want to move to another GP, but I don't know if any others are better in the area. Will any GPs, who are actually any good in the area, be able to cope with a mass influx of disgruntled DMC patients?

So Italy is appalling, but Rome appears to have cycle lights on most of their traffic lights, unlike London. So if Italy is crap, what does that make us?

So even Italy, the home of the notoriously dangerous driver and near economic collapse, is putting us to shame.

What if drivers took responsibility for their actions for once?

Er, it's a thread about cyclists and road safety. You can always resurrect the pavement cycling thread if you want to bang on about that again.

Pedestrian deaths are nothing to do with cycle safety and why are you only looking at pedestrian deaths anyway? You should be looking at total deaths caused by all modes of transport if we are examining safety on our roads.