PokerTime

That's right Jah. That kind of connection will always leads to cries of foul. I agree with you DaveR. The case against Brooks was weak, Coulson, iron clad. Juries have to be sure beyond reasonable doubt. That's what always amuses me too about the reporting of not guilty verdicts 'the jury have found you not guilty'. 'Found' is a word that exonerates the jury of letting the guilty get away with it, as much as defining the injustice of those wrongly accused. On the other hand, maybe Brooks is only guilty of being an employee of an organisation over which she had no real control over methods. We shall never know.

Sigh....the decendance in to left/ right rhetoric again - so lazy. People on both the right and left are able to buy influence, if they have connections and enough money. We will never know for sure if a legal team with high connections within a government and the establishment had any influence in determining a not guilty verdict - but one would think, given the nature of the case, it was always going to lead to questions of corruption using a legal team like that.

And biting can be dangerous if the person biting has a condition like hepatitus or HIV.

I think FIFA have got it right. None of this is about Liverpool, or Uraguay per se. It's about the conduct of one man, Suarez, and the punishment has to be directed at him. If Liverpool are the club unlucky enough to have him on their books, then tough. Suarez is a liability when he behaves like that. FIFA are right to make everyone connected with him, realise the cost of that liability. Perhaps if he can't get employment because of his actions, it might just make the thug understand he isn't above the law. If he had done that on a street corner after a night out, he'd be up on an ABH charge and common assualt.

That certainly seems to be the view. Although getting a jury to find the desired verdict can't always be guaranteed, finding a prosecutor and/or witnesses that play ball definitely can be done. Like most people I'm astounded that both Mr and Mrs Brooks were found not guilty. There's no way you can be that high up in a newspaper and not know how stories are being sought and found. I'd totally understand if Coulson feels like the hog roast!

This may help also El Pibe http://www.tvcatchup.com/watch/2#3

Give these guys a call... http://www.londonwildcaretrust.co.uk/

I always had the impression that yummy mummy was more of a class thing than a gender issue. I've heard many women use the term to describe women of a different class to themselves.

I think the affection stems from being the first of it's kind. It was a bold idea, and one that has been copied in various forms. Hence expressions like 'pride in the NHS' etc. You can go to Kings and be seen by some of the top consultants in the world in some areas, irregardless of ability to pay. That's what a National Health Service brings to all. And it can only bring that if it remains a people before profit enterprise.

NHS spending comes in at around 8-10% of GDP which I think is good value given it's qaulity and the care it offers a population of 65 million, and by 2010 it had dropped as a % of GDP - this at a time of a Labour government who traditionally spend more on public services. Also we kind of sit in the middle of the table of healthcare expenditure across Europe, with countries spending on average between 6 and 11 % of GDP on healthcare. The NHS costs around ?105 billion a year. National Insurance contributions raise around ?95 billion a year. Income tax and NI combined raises around 40% of GDP. And the NHS forms around 18% of public service costs. I think most people would rank healthcare at the top of a list, along with education, employment and housing. These articles and indeed government spin doctors are very good at confusing inefficiency with overall budgets. Well the budget is not spiralling out of control, and looking at figures going back over decades never has. What can be seen though is a steady increase in the cost of healthcare provision that's pretty much in line with inflation. Moves to privatise the NHS are part of a longer process to decontruct the welfare state, and to sell off everything to private markets, because we all know don't we that the free market takes care of all!!! NOT.... My view is that the Healthcare is not a railway or an energy company. We've seen what happens when private profiteers get hold of eassential services. The NHS also leads the world in teaching and research. There are other ways for the NHS to raise or save money without making it a private enterprise.

I agree LD. Can't see any good from this move and am baffled as to why Miliband would dream up such a policy. There are many 18-21 years olds whose parents can not afford to keep them. There are young adults coming out of care too. Would prefer to hear what any party plans to do to get investment and job creation going, what they plan to do to rebalance the economy across the country, what they plan to do to tackle high unemployment amongst the young and over 45s and what they plan to do about the billions spent subsidising employers that pay too little.

Why not uninstall the malware software? Go to control panel - programmes - select the software from the list - hit the ununstall bustton at the top. Hope that helps.

Are there any good places locally to go for a vegan meal? Any ideas appreciated.

I think though, in a world where so many people get away with exactly this type of crime, any help to bring these thieving scumbags to account is to be applauded. The Police can't be everywhere, but sometimes, ordinary people are. If a person feels confident and competant enough to go after a thief, then I for one applaud that.

There are still agreements to be made on the plans for the station and surrounding area with Network Rail. I think the Khans plans look great. Benedict O'Looney, the architect has been very involved with Peckham Vision and the Peckham Society over the years and has a strong interest in conservation of historical buildings. Hope it goes ahead. Would be good to see a gastro pub in the Lane too.

Lot's of French people in ED, and Huguenots were amongst the earliest residents in the surrounding areas. Champion Hill and De Crespigny Park for example are the name of the estate that formerly stood there, owned by a Huguenot refugee of the family of Crespigny. His descendant Claude Champion de Crespigny entertained the Prince Regent there in 1804 and was made a baronet the following year. There are many roads locally whose names tell of a strong French invasion to 'these ere parts' going back centuries!

So sorry to hear of your loss :( The Blue Cross in Victoria have 24 hour emergency vets, as do the PDSA in Thamesmead. Whilst they are both charities that offer treatment to those unable to afford private vetinary treatment, I've never known them to turn away any emergency.

That is true Jeremy, as it is in other places in the North and Midlands. It is true to say that some of the problems in London and the South East are the of a result of a south east centric economy. It's all very well telling people to move to find work but imagine if all the unemployed of the North moved to London! So for me, some of the solution lies in regenerating the economy outside of the South East, so that people want to move there. Presently we have a climate of bash the jobless, but what can the jobless do in areas if high unemployment (as much as 25% in some towns). The shift in population density accross the country over the last 50 years is a huge part of the story when it comes to the supply and demand factor. Instead of tackling that in any kind of meaningful way, we end up with hugely expensive capital projects like HS2 and vanity projects like the Olympics.

Just to support SJ a little here. There's a different between taking a risk in a market that geniunely is susceptible to the swings of genuine market forces, and buying into something that has been to a large extent shielded from normal market forces (whatever the rights and wrongs of that may be). When the recession hit at the end of the 80s, 300,000 homes were reposessed or thrown into negative equity. But the housing market didn't crash. It simply saw a dip for around three years before bouncing back stronger than ever. Sucessive governments have learnt from that which is why, in the latest financial crisis, one far worse than anything in the last 30 years, and whilst jobs have been lost, business has struggled and the economy per se has seen drastic austerity policy, the Housing Market has continued to grow and be as strong as ever. Whilst demand and supply is definitely one factor, the transformation of housing into a sure fire high return investment through the 90's and 00's is also part of the problem. That was absolutely enabled by government deregulaton and the new mortgage products banks could dream up from that. Banks are not in business to care about who can buy a home, just that homes can continue to be bought and sold at a profit. So SJs disdain is valid imo.

Mine came today. It's now lining the litter tray unread :)

I never got hurt paintballing, but did enjoy my new found ability to shoot with such accuracy at the face mask! Aiming between the eyes rendered the opposition helpless whilst I charged with my paint grenade!!!! And yes I spent around ?150 that day, but it was sooooo worth it :D

The issue though SJ is that those who BTL do so because it's an investment, with a return (usually) - and there are agencies that promote BTL as an investment opportunity and take care of everything. They are removed from any kind of ethics, or indeed the difficulties of many, as they are already on the ladder. I'm with you in your criticism of BTL, but mainly because I see BTL as another market deregulation, introduced at the time as yet another scheme to keep the market bouyant. If you chart the timeline of the various deregulations and the products mortgage lenders were then able to introduce as a result, you see a direct correlation between the dipping of first time buyers and new products. The latest is 'Help to Buy'. The Housing Market is basically one big pyramid scheme that has been happily kept going by sucessive governments. In reply to a couple of earlier posts; LM, Housing is subsidised by Housing Benefit and not much else. In fact there has been a deliberate attempt to make it difficult for councils for example, to build affordable housing, with any help in the form of capital grants (or their equivalents) being given to private companies or to a lesser degree HAs. That's how you end up with a private company redeveloping the Heygate and set to make ?194 million whilst only providng 79 affordable homes for rent, instead of the 1200 council homes that were cleared to sell the land at a price that lost the council money. There are similar schemes in other boroughs, all of which will achieve nothing more than a depletion of affordable housing whilst moving the poorest out of zone 2. DaveR, I think if there weren't fundamental problems with access to housing, no-one would care about BTL. People are trying to make sense of things like why it now take multiples up to 9x of salary to buy a first home, compared to the 3.5x of 30 years ago, that their parents were faced with. Deregulation in various ways has led to artificial inflation. Many industries would love to have had the level of tinkering the Housing Market has had. It's very complex though in reality, and any solutions (and they do exist) are equally complex and in some ways controversial. It used to be that if you worked hard, even though your job was ordinary, you could in time buy a modest house. It used to be that if you earned an above average wage, had worked hard to acquire a profession, you could buy a nicer house. Now the ordinary worker has no hope of ever owning anything, and the professional will have to sacrifice a huge chunk of salary for a basic property. That's what we need to look at imo.

Gringle, when you bought the tickets were you given a leaflet or anything outlining ammunition/ extra costs (per person)? Paintballing is a fun day out but as anyone who's done it knows, it's the ammunition that determines how much you spend on the day. If you were not adaquately informed of additional costs (per person), costs that would have been the difference between you buying the tickets on offer and not buying them, you may have a case for trading standards under the following legislation. http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/brighton-hove/con1item.cgi?file=*ADV1011-1111.txt It would also be worth (as Admin) contacting the local sorting office to the company to see if delivery of your returned tickets was attempted before actual delivery. It may be that liability lies with Royal Mail for not delivering on time and they have a seperate claim process. You can only be sued for defamation if you have lied about the facts. It's clear you feel you have been misled and that's the route to pursue. It may be that the company is not at fault but that its salespeople need retraining. Trading Standards would be able to advise on that. Michelle May is Customer Services Manager at Delta Force Paintball. Maybe seeking a resolution with her directly and privately would lead to a goodwill gesture?

I unterstand the analogy being made, but SJ is right (imo) in that it's perhaps a poor analogy. I could flip your point by saying that many farms are subsidised by EU grants and measures are taken to make sure food doesn't become totally unaffordable, whereas as no concern is acted upon to use measures to ensure the affordability of housing. They are both essentials, but we don't interfere with the Housing Market like we do with food production. What would you have in place of Housing Benefit BS? The government has tried capping it below average market levels and it hasn't worked to bring rents down (no suprise there).

I don't agree. The cost of feeding a family of four (without luxuries admittedly) is never more than the cost of renting a home for a family of four. Food banks exist because people are being left without benefits and because families are left with nothing for food after paying bills, including rent.