JohnL

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Interesting point on East Europeans as many second > generation voted to leave the EU and the general > anti-EU feeling being propagated in Poland and > being bought in by some recent arrivals. I've got > a few Polish friends so this is based on the > facts. Just surprised that the EU has been > generally positive for the East. Poland would have been a natural ally for Britain but some of the things that happened after the Brexit vote scuppered some of that. William and Kate out there mending relations though so the government realises :)

So many East Europeans that have served me at coffee shops and pubs telling me they're leaving. A few UK people seem to have left too (probably planned to already but Brexit accelerated their plans). NHS will be looking to India (again) to fill their shortages.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's to do with working out our future immigration > policy and is a perfectly sensible idea. It's easy > to forget that after 40 years of being a > subjugated nation to the EU dictatorship we've > lost the habit of making our own rules. > > So we'll need x thousand pea pickers in > Lincolnshire, asparagus in Cambridgeshire and > fruit and veg harvesters all round the country for > example. No problem, give them visas for the > season as part of the immigration quota to be > employed directly by the British Businesses > concerned. With luck it will cut out the criminal > gang masters who oversee much of this murky > business. > > As an aside, I see one of the sticking points in > the EU negotiations at the moment is the EU > rejection of Britain's perfectly sensible > suggestion that all EU Citizens entering The UK > post Brexit be given criminal records checks. I > wonder what the EU has to hide? The EU has always been sensitive about sharing criminal records with non EU countries - US is not supposed to know if you have a criminal record (but UK secretly shared ours anyway). I think it's because the EU believes someone who smoked a joint 30 years ago should not be banned from US (or UK in future).

or as Larry @Number10Cat tweeted (he gets more & more political) "Amber Rudd has commissioned a major study into shutting stable doors after horses have bolted and been blamed for bad stable door management" Meanwhile Theresa Mays gone on a 3 week walking holiday in northern Italy (does she care anymore).

Laugh at Boris, but before he left as London Mayor he commissioned this report (in respect of Outer London). https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/organisations-we-work/outer-london-commission-olc/olc-and-full-review-london-plan

If London is going to be dragged kicking and screaming through Brexit by the rest of the country they can't expect London to stand back and not demand infrastructure development. I can only talk about South Wales other than London - but similar issues. I was disappointed that electrification of the Cardiff to Swansea line won't go ahead - there is so much EU investment in South Wales they have more disappointments coming. I hope the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon goes ahead too but won't be surprised if it doesn't.

You'd think that someone doing this and being ignored even when people think they are genuinely injured (as they will do I'd guess) would get despondent about the human race.

Parking is underground ? Finished in 2023. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/new-images-show-how-development-at-centre-of-franks-gentrification-row-is-due-to-look-a3586456.html The architects were meant to be http://www.ahmm.co.uk/ - nothing on their webpage - has that partnership fallen through ?

Police authorised to use stingers (mostly behind firewall) https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stingers-deployed-to-stop-moped-crime-b6csdc2vr

Well all I googled was this https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/finance/mergers-and-acquisitions/confectioner-hope-and-greenwood-rescued-from-administration/523847.article can't read the article because The Grocer is subscription only (how will they ever get on HIGNFY)

Looks like the parents have ended there fight.

"Secondly, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the phrase (innocently) used above 'Not a life worth living'. Who is to decide this? In some respects the medical condition and its effects suffered by Stephen Hawking could be described as a life not worth living yet he's certainly put me to shame " Well after my mother had a stroke my sisters swore they just said "we're turning it off now' not 'can we turn it off'. Maybe she had a living will I didn't know about. Hawking has an very abnormal slow progressing version of motor neurone disease - so he could plan what he wanted from a very young age - and as an intelligent man he did and will have for the future.

jacks09 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > jacks09 Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > What sits uncomfortably for me is that anyone > > > apart from the parents can have the final say > > on > > > issues relating to the child. It just > doesn't > > sit > > > right with me that a hospital/judge/state can > > > determine a course of action that the parents > > > don't agree with. > > > > What would you say if the position were > reversed > > and parents were trying to block treatment > which > > would keep a child alive - for example a > Jehovah's > > Witness trying to prevent a life-saving blood > > transfusion? Would it still be acceptable for > the > > parents to have the final say, even if it meant > > the death of the child? The wishes of the > parents > > must be taken into consideration, but they > cannot > > always be paramount, for they may not always > > (often for the most understandable of reasons, > as > > in this case) be in the best interests of the > > child. > > In that example it is clear that harm will be > caused to the child, that doesn't appear to be the > case in the CG example, if i am mistaken please do > say. I guess there are no right answers in this > horrible case. In the 70/80s you would hear of people in comas for years who woke up. What would be the moral case for keeping a baby alive artificially on the off chance of recovery (say it's 10%) in 10 years time ?

On the other hand to what I said above - life support is turned off so quickly these days - often before close relatives even have a chance to get bedside. If it had been an older person rather than a baby I think it would have been turned off very quickly.

According to GOSH the issue isn't financial it's pain and chances of recovery. If that's true it's horrible - the boy is half alive half dead with no real hope

Sean Spicer has flounced. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40687521

How do you know women are for you. 🏳️‍🌈

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > bobbsy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > IMO, police should chase them, and if the perp > is > > injured/killed in the chase, so be it. > > > And how would you feel if innocent bystanders were > injured/killed during the chase?... But I thought they chased them if they were wearing helmets but didn't if they weren't. So bystanders are at risk anyway by the helmeted chase.

Don't forget that horrible attack in Greenwich

and quietly as if nothing has happened this is now today government policy http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/michael-gove-transitional-period-for-brexit-agreed-philip-hammond-may_uk_597117ade4b09e5f6cce4019

Even Liam Fox now saying there will be a transition period of a few years. That means this Government won't be delivering Brexit.

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone deserve to earn more than say, the > Prime Minister. the answer IMO is no. And as I > said in an earlier post we are talking about the > use of public money. How can these people justify > such high wages plus who actually sets and agrees > these wages. They clearly need to take > responsibility and be accountable for the > decisions they made about spending License payers > money on such astronomical wages. Wha's more these > are generally part time jobs, it's not as if they > do them all day every day. In the case of Chris > good heEvans, it is not like he broadcasts every > day for 8hrs a day. Market forces at the time you negotiate - so probably a few years ago for Chris Evans. It's difficult to then reduce somebody's wage when they fail.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'n not debating. I'm giving my views which are > correct and you should all adopt. > > It's a competitive market and the BBC need to pay > accordingly. The value of those tssers who used > to do Top Gear demonstrates that. > > For many I understand why they command decent > salaries. > > Chris Evans is an annoying opinionated so and so. > Entertaining but still the former (and oh so > sycophantic when with celeb guests). He's not > worth 5 time Jeremy Vine Unless you believe it's not really talent but a job. Let new people try it.

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought Alan Yentob had left the BBC. They explained this on Sky - he has one show he does it seems called Imagine

On equal pay - your pay is dependent on what the demand is at the time of negotiations in the private sector - and I assume it's similar at the BBC - so whats happening with women at the BBC - when they negotiate are they being let down by someone (whoever advises them). http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/bbc-faces-threat-of-legal-action-from-female-stars-in-gender-pay-gap-storm-a3591506.html