bawdy-nan

Yesterday the NPCC and the College of Policing issued guidance for police on ?what?s allowed?. It?s very helpful and probably worth a quick read not least before you are tempted to send an email denouncing someone for say, I don?t know, working their allotment. Would be great if the local police teams could also have a quick scan. https://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/COVID-19/Documents/What-constitutes-a-reasonable-excuse.pdf

As part of Tete a Tete's annual opera festival they're heading south and putting on an event in a house in Tollgate Drive. Fresh from its sell-out Tokyo run, this site-specific, Anglo-Japanese work invites audiences to become voyeurs as they move freely around a private residence to eavesdrop on small ensembles of singers, a dancer, and Japanese and Western instruments as this intimate drama unfolds? https://www.tete-a-tete.org.uk/event/the%E9%8D%B5key/ 14:00-15:15 & 18:00-19:15, Saturday 3rd August 2019 14:00-15:15 & 18:00-19:15, Sunday 4th August 2019 Music: Francesca Le Loh? Words: Francesca Le Loh? with excerpts from Junichiro Tanizaki?s ?The Key? in the original Japanese. ?20 years of marriage yet I can?t speak with my wife? But the husband is desperate to communicate with his wife about one subject in particular ? their mutually unfulfilling sex life.Inspired by the novella of the same name by renowned Japanese author Junichiro Tanizaki, ?The Key? peers in on a secretive family and newcomer Kimura, as their lives take a dramatic turn following the husband?s new year resolution. Produced by The Kagi Project 10 Tollgate Drive, SE21 7LS Twitter: @Kagi_TheKey

Nothing I;ve tried has worked entirely. I have watched slugs glide over coffee grounds, wept at the devastation beyond the wool pellets and backed away as crows fight for the eggshells. Nematodes will only kill the slugs underground apparently. I'd second planting things they like less (though they even ate my onions and I found several on the leaves). The other thing that has made a difference for me is picking them and scissoring them. (If you're squeamish you could relocate them to the park). On my allotment I picked 185 one day and then more than 200 the next. After that I still find them but usually only about 40 or 50 a time. Try and find them at dusk or at night using a torch, and / or put out some lures... half a grapefruit, a plank or two, a wet newspaper or carboard box. You'll then be able to find them and snip, snip snip.

Hi Angelina - sorry - that wasn't a criticism (or necessarily) directed at you. Really glad they had a good time and it all went well.

Really glad it went well. Broadly speaking, depending on how old the "teens" are, if you are intending to provide alcohol at a party (or to "allow" it), I think you ought to discuss it with the parents of the children you're planning on inviting and giving it to. What you might think is ok for your child might not be ok for other people. I was horrified when I found out parents of year 9 children (aged 13 - 14) were blithely "allowing" alcohol at house parties not only because of the damage that alcohol can do to young brains, the dubious message that it sends about the "correct" way to socialise, but also that those parents felt they had the right to decide things for my children.

We were expecting Rome to be very expensive (eating wise) but found it surprisingly cheap. The ice-cream's lovely and v cheap and you can get very good meals for not a great deal. We stayed in Trastevere and found some lovely restaurants including a place to get pizza by weight (you can sit down and there;s drinks too). It was incredibly delicious and incredibly cheap (fed a family of 4 for 20 euros) http://www.pizzerialaboccaccia.it/ This was a nice eat-in pizza placehttp://darpoeta.com/ This place was good value and delicious https://www.lonelyplanet.com/italy/rome/restaurants/trattoria-da-lucia/a/poi-eat/389059/359975 If you're looking for something quite extraordinary - one of the best evenings we had was in a restaurant where the waiters perform a ribald kind of cabaret... hard to explain really but def worth a look. Went there by accident. Cencio La Parolaccia: https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g187791-d1049551-Reviews-Cencio_La_Parolaccia-Rome_Lazio.html

This place was lovely and not very busy - layers and layers of Rome https://www.lonelyplanet.com/italy/rome/attractions/basilica-di-san-clemente/a/poi-sig/389439/359975 Of the touristy places: The Capitoline Museum(s) was spectacular and VERY quiet (really recommend this) The Galleria Borghese was absolutely worth it and worth booking in advance The Vatican museums were hideously busy, St Peter's not so bad.

I wonder if the kitchen in the pilot would count as "awesome"?

If it is true that they are Foundation Coaches then you might try contacting the person who manages them. In the past, when I had cause to complain about the coaches parking outside Dulwich Prep, blocking the cycle lane feeder and parking on double yellow lines they were really very helpful. Contact Mr Leslie Okyne Transport Manager Foundation Schools' Coach Service Dulwich College London SE21 7LD Phone: 020 8299 9262 Mobile: 07712 924999 email: [email protected] Mrs Sharah Hutchinson Transport Administrator email: [email protected] Mrs Shirley Hardy Customer Services email: [email protected] Edited to say that the transport manager appears to have changed. Here's a link to contact details http://www.dulwich.org.uk/foundation-schools-coach-service/contact

One of the problems you'll encounter is the attitude of other parents who have decided that alcohol is ok for teens - theirs and, surprisingly often, other people's children. Alcohol at 15 is dangerous. Young people's bodies and brains are still developing as is, of course, their sense of risk and responsibility. Not drinking alcohol is best but keeping them safe and encouraging them to try and keep themselves safe has to be the ultimate aim. Picking them up from parties, talking to them about their plans, getting them to check in with you, knowing who they are with; talking to them about drugs and sex and how to get help; having a plan for it things go wrong; letting them know that you and their friends parents talk about what they're up to, sharing facts http://www.talktofrank.com/drug/alcohol, letting them (and their friend's parents) know the legal situation, etc all help. I know some parents who buy their 13 and 14-year-olds "lower alcohol" drinks (alcopops basically) which I won't do. Their reasoning is that ot means they are less likely to experiment with spirits. I say, hmmmmmmmmm. Good luck!

page 80 refers to the "Hidden Economy". The Taylor report uses the ?6.2 billon figure from the HMRC report I linked to above but then asserts that the "hidden economy" is the largely the "self-employed" whereas the HMRC report says that it is largely the employed who are the cause of the "hidden economy" shortfall.

Dear Knick Knack etc ... I replied specifically to you because you wrote that the self-employed have been "getting away with it" and that the ?6.2 billion related to them. It doesn't. I think it's important, when it comes to besmirching, to be accurate. I quite agree that people should pay their taxes.

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > window cleaner, gardener, hairdresser, cleaner > (house), oven cleaner - what other jobs are cash > in hand?? Most cleaning firms that offer services aren't cash in hand, never been to a hairdressers where I've been asked to pay cash that hasn't gone through a till, the only time I;ve used a gardener they gave me a receipt ... (hardly ever) clean my own windows and oven. The only thing I've paid cash for, aside from tips, is babysitting and that usually to a "young person". When I used a "professional" babysitter or flexible nanny on an ad hoc basis I had to run their weekly pay through PAYE and register as an employer.

Mick Mac wrote: The report quotes ?6bn - that's a lot of babysitting. Relatively low earners in the employed sector pay their share of tax - Just because one is self employed doesn't mean one can defraud the government. Aren't you missing the point? The article you quote Nigello doesn't mention 6.2 billion. Other news articles do and indeed the Taylor report does. The figure comes from an HMRC report which you can read in full here. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160618143921/https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/470540/HMRC-measuring-tax-gaps-2015-1.pdf#page=11 The figure of ?6.2 billion relates to the "Hidden Economy" and is an "illustrative" estimate produced from estimated figures for 2013-14 (?4.1 billion). The estimates are, they stress, "experimental". The Hidden Economy is described as being related to: "Undeclared economic activity that involves what we call ?ghosts? ? whose entire income is unknown to HMRC, and ?moonlighters? ? who are known to us in relation to part of their income, but have other sources of income that HMRC does not know about. According to the report: "The direct tax hidden economy estimate is ?4.1 billion in 2013-14. This consists of ghosts (?1.2 billion), moonlighters (?1.9 billion) and Pay As You Earn individuals not in Self Assessment (?1.0 billion). So by HMRC's own reckoning approximately a quarter of the "Hidden Economy" are in fact, employees (in PAYE) who don't declare additional income through SA, and another half are "moonlighters" which HMRC describes thus: ?Moonlighters? are individuals who pay tax on their main job through PAYE, but who fail to declare earnings from a second job or additional income from self-employment. Just over another quarter are people who simply don't declare any income at all. The "ghosts". These people don't have the status of being "self-employed". So, in fact. Mick Mack, according to the source document from HMRC the problem is not with the self-employed it is with the employed. It is those already within PAYE that are being referred to when that figure of ?6.2 billion is bandied about. As you say, "Just because one is employed one can't defraud the government"

yeah those low paid self-employed people with their no sick pay, holiday pay, pension rights, job security, non-equitable access to benefits, practically impossible to get mortgages they've had it far too good for way too long. Obviously, it's the self-employed rather than the corporate tax evaders who are causing the most problems. I don't know of any regular acceptable "cash in hand" jobs aside from babysitting jobs for teens.

My son did this a couple of years ago and it was brilliant http://www.yes-tuitionandtraining.co.uk/index.html

The introduction of a CPZ won't make any difference as you can drop a flex zipcar anywhere in the flex zone, aside from some housing estates which are marked on the app. I've used these cars a few times and found it great: going out when I know I want to drink, so driving there in a zip car and getting a bus home for example.Having access to them made a recent period without our usual car, easily manageable. It is, of course, not as cheap as a bus but its so much cheaper than a taxi. I find it more convenient and flexible than a "by the hour, return to the bay" hire. If there were more of them and the rates settled into something combining the two schemes (ie they were more practical for a longer hire) then I might consider ditching the car altogether (thereby freeing up a parking space). I can understand why people who have cars are annoyed by these cars appearing on their streets as I know that parking can be tricky but you might be equally annoyed at your neighbours who have a car all to themselves. At least the zip cars are available to anyone who wants to use them. It feels like a better use of limited resources (ie street parking space) than a community where each household insists on having it's own car. This scenario clearly only works when not everyone has a car. Feels hard to make the case that private car owners should have priority over something with wider community benefit.

I would totally recommend Litvinoff and Fawcett http://www.landf.co.uk/ Hand made, very good quality and very good value. Plus an utter joy to visit the showroom.

37 route is pretty ok as an alternative (up to about 7.45)

This, this, this bmoney Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I am not following. A cyclist going on the > inside > > of a vehicle at an intersection or bend is one > of > > the dumbest things possible, > > I'm not saying it's smart, I'm saying it's poor > design. The road design there encourage people to > do potentially dangerous things - changing the > design is the most efficient way to change > behaviour. > > > It deserves a Darwin > > award http://www.darwinawards.com/ for the > > improvement of the human species by removing > dumb > > genes from the gene pool. > > 2edgy4me

sigh ... what I am saying is that an unprotected bike lane encourages you to think that you have a lane not that you are undertaking in a "normal" lane and it is most often the case that you are not undertaking but are being "overtaken". By your assertion no large vehicle should ever pass a bike in a bike lane? Of course travelling on the kerbside of a large vehicle is dangerous and I am (of course) not suggesting this as a course of action. A vehicle turning left across a lane of traffic, whether a bike lane or a fully "trafficed" lane doesn't have right of way. What I'm saying is that having large vehicles turn across a bike lane is pretty dangerous. DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > bawdy-nan Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > [...] to be alongside a > > vehicle on the right is not to be behaving > > dangerously rather, using the road as it is > laid > > out. > > I disagree in the strongest possible way! > > If you're riding next to a large vehicle, there is > a good chance you'll be in its blind spot. If you > are approaching a bend, you might get crushed as > the large vehicle turns. If you're approaching an > intersection, the large vehicle might make a turn > and not see you, even if it signals. Lastly, if > the road is straight, the risks are much lower, > but there is still the risk the large vehicle > might change lane and, again, not see you. And all > of this for what? To assert a constitutional right > to ride next to a large vehicle? To reach your > destination 30 seconds earlier? Our lives are > worth more than that... Make an honest assessment > of the pros and cons and explain why anyone should > ride next to a large vehicle. > > Notice I say 'our' lives because this is exactly > what I do when I ride my motorcycle; I am speaking > out of direct personal experience here.

I don't know what happened here but have cycled that stretch of road a lot. That stretch of road has a cycle lane running on the left side of the road which is to say cyclists encouraged to assume that is "their" road space and to be alongside a vehicle on the right is not to be behaving dangerously rather, using the road as it is laid out. A large vehicle turning left across this cycle lane, where cyclists expect and are encouraged by road markings to expect, to be able to proceed safely is a nightmare scenario. A properly segregated cycle path and lights for vehicles turning left across is would help. https://goo.gl/maps/Y6J2ggub9uS2

When the most recent stats on knife crime in London came out Scotland Yard representatives were interviewed: "Duncan Ball said: ?This is not an issue we will ever arrest or enforce our way out of,? adding that police, schools, parents and communities would need to tackle the underlying causes of what Ball described as young people seeing life as cheap on Britain?s street." So, who is to blame? The police identify themselves, schools, parents and, er, communities. What was also interesting in the article is this: "Police estimate there are fewer than 300 who carry a knife on a regular basis in London and Haydon said police would be helped by a new law introduced this summer which jails those caught carrying a knife twice." So, the police reckon on around 300 people "regularly" carrying knives. Even allowing for the fact that some people carry knives on an adhoc basis, or indeed resort to the mysterious "other weapons" asserted by a previous poster, this is a tiny percentage of the current London secondary school population of 488,160 pupils. I don't underestimate the impact of knife crime on young people and I do agree that there are far too many deaths and injuries and that this is absolutely unacceptable. But demonising young people and asserting such arrant nonsense about most of them carrying weapons is wrong. I'm very sorry that the teacher who has posted about this feels so upset by their work (which, one hopes at least, isn't teaching Maths or any kind of subject that deals with statistics).

Really? "the kids" and their desire for weapons and their belief that all other "the kids" are carrying weapons. That's absolute and utter nonsense and, frankly, irresponsible scare-mongering. Might I suggest you meet and talk to some of "the kids". I don't doubt that knife crime amongst young people in London is worth taking seriously and applaud, whole-hearetdly the work of organisations like Redthread (do listen to that radio doc it is utterly amazing) but most of "the kids" you will meet, if you deign to engage with them, are passionate, energetic, very hard working and thoughtful. Absolutely worth talking to and listening to.

Hello I'm working with The Centre for the History of the Emotions at QMUL on an audio project that will enhance and illuminate the work of the researchers there. I'm making a series of podcasts, some documentary style, some dramas, about emotions and health. It's part of a Wellcome Trust funded project, Living with Feeling https://projects.history.qmul.ac.uk/livingwithfeeling/. These audio pieces will be issued as podcasts as well as being made available on a new website. One of the first podcasts we're making is about the idea of "normal". Where this idea came from in a medical and social context and what it means now to people. There was an event at the Pathology Museum at Barts where there were all kinds of stalls and talks. The podcast will include recordings from that event as well as interviews with researchers. I also want to include people talking about their own experiences and one of the areas that we're interested in is how parents, especially, new parents are encouraged to think about their baby's "normal" development. I remember, for example, when my two were very small, mapping their progress through the "What to Expect When You're Expecting" and "What to Expect the First 12 months" books. What I'd like to do is record some interviews with some people with young babies. I'd then include extracts from the interviews in the podcast. It would probably take about half and hour to an hour and I can do this at your home or can find somewhere local that 's quiet to record. If you're interested and would like to take part, or would like to find out more, then please send me a private message.