snowy

Whirled is in Loughborough Junction (and has been there for years!) highly recommended...

And the same could be said about many people and many different faiths, so what's your point? Are you supporting British First's Penge Poundland fascist?

If it's a traffic offense, then regularly reporting the coaches to the Met via https://www.met.police.uk/roadsafelondon/

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes, foxes are beautiful creatures, I totally > agree. but aren't they scavengers, much like a dog > always looking for the next thing to eat? > > What I do not like is them marking and pooing > everywhere and being a general nuisance in the > garden. > > IMO foxes are wild creatures and should be in the > countryside, they are not natural town animals. It > is us humans who have encouraged them into cities > and so they scavenge for food (quite often > discarded take away food). That compounded by > people feeding them makes them less wary of us > humans. They become bolder and make homes on > unused land etc. Naturally they breed and so more > foxes are about. Don't get me wrong, yes they are > beautiful to look at but not in towns, Sorry. How do you feel about seagulls?

Or more likely they both use a press service to source a lot of their content?

Joe, I think you'll find that the street dealers are still there; just that technology has hidden then a little!

Coincidentally popped in for a pint yesterday afternoon (limited beer choices). It was relatively busy, but fewer people eating than I was anticipating. Not going to be racing back, but it's good to know its there and not permanently lost to residential/retail.

I've been in Newcastle for the great north run. Saw someone in a long sleeved t-shirt.

Been reading the Andy McNab novels again?

America's Director of Communications latest tweet: "I made a mistake in trusting in a reporter. It won't happen again." after ringing up New Yorker magazine and talking to a journalist.

It's slightly worrying that you took on a significant investment and responsibility without having any understanding of UK property and tenancy laws.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > it happened in Brixton where a number of schools > (including Effra) were sold to developers and > converted into flats. A resulting shortage of > school places was not anticipated as there was a > shortage of foresight. > > It would be nice to think that lessons have been > learned and developers have to contribute to the > community in their application. The old - no longer fit for purpose school, with a playground on the roof was replaced with a purpose built (and award winning) building next door. It also moved to be in an early years provider - changing the age range of children it supports.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rh you are only quoting those that are actually > convicted- tip of the iceberg... > https://fullfact.org/europe/over-here-and-under-ar > rest-are-romanians-responsible-90-atm-crime/ > how many are still on the loose? You didn't read to the end of your link though did you?

Your bank account gets flagged if you transfer smallish sums nowadays (the threshold is ?5k from memory) as a money laundering check... hence the rise of bitcoin etc.

"Stirrers" you are really scraping the bottom of a very deep barrel.

Doesn't funding for this come from a different source (ie. not LB Southwark ) but from a devolved budget from Transport for London? So if you want to lobby for local pavements, carry on doing so, but additional cycle storage isn't going to be in competition to that.

You are Alf Garnett aicmfp

Its a dotted line - that doesn't make it a dedicated lane, as vehicles are allowed to cross it. Its about 3 foot wide, and as your photos shows, is often full of tourists, pedestrians, glass shards and other rubbish. The cyclist is perfectly entitled to be riding where they are. (but this is a massive digression from dogs & parks, so should probably be lounged)

Someone's a fan of Arrested Development! Chick, hope they find their way home.

Burbage Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jules-and-Boo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Volunteeer - gives up time to do things for > others > > As do unpaid interns. But organisations that rely > on those haven't come in for undue praise > recently, either. > > Besides, volunteering can be murky. Take, for > example, Groundwork, a charity reliant on > volunteers to help do its work of 'creating better > and greener places'. Its roots, however, are in > the Countryside Commission, now the government > agency known as Natural England. And so some of > the 'volunteers' aren't so much volunteers as > labour units supplied on referral from the > JobCentre via Serco, Avanta et al. for the 'work > programme'. Whether the real volunteers are aware > of the role of the outsourcers, or of Groundwork's > involvement in sending out sanctions letters to > unwilling 'volunteers', or of the European Social > Fund money that's being used to cover up the > JobCentre's inability to find actual jobs, is > unclear. > > Even if they do, there's an incentive to keep > quiet, in the implicit promise of work beyond > volunteering. And, looked at in in another way, > Groundwork's effectively a limb of government that > can tout for donations and rely on volunteers, > like any other charity, in the course of doing > government work. Though, by being a sub-contractor > to Serco, Avanta et. al., rather than the DWP, > it's not publicly accountable, and that doesn't > feel quite right. > > In other Big Society news, it's worth looking at > conclusion 7 of a recent report into the > government's National Citizen Service, set up with > a deliberately deceptive structure. Serco, in that > case, got out in time, but not all have exited so > gracefully, and I suspect questions might be asked > about this one. Again, here's a not-bad-idea that, > because of its public-private-charity structure, > doesn't look quite right, either. > > Both, in different ways and to different extents, > are using charitable organisations almost as > smokescreens. But that shouldn't, whether they > rely on volunteers or not, absolve them from the > same levels of accountability as any other > organisation. Yet so often it does, because it's > so difficult for most of us to get angry with a > volunteer, or lay into a company that doesn't pay > tax. > > So I would take Lynne's side here - especially if > the 'person in charge' wasn't a volunteer (they > often aren't, if only for insurance reasons). But > what I don't understand is why Lynne decided to > bother the community with her foot-stamping prose > rather than unbottling the green ink and doing the > thing in style. Write to the management, why don't > you? Their (groundworks) structure and financial history is a long topic. However if they were truly a govt arm of social action delivery - as you suggest - they wouldn't have almost gone bankrupt in 2015 due to govt funding cuts. Are they actually a work programme sub prime? The blurring of the lines between govt intervention programmes and charity is a longer discussion and one worth having but not after a night in the pub. I'm not sure how NCS can survive after that NAO report, but they instantly got punted a huge chunk of tax cash.

Here they are: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgLRpKohrKk

What happened to the US National Security Council yesterday Louisa?

Not quite East Dulwich, but the Flower Lady in Herne Hill still has some.

The cab company still functions (it's just that the office doesn't really operate any more).