Blah Blah

Not the same thing lowlander. Drinking and driving has far more serious consequnces than driving at 30mphr, which is why people lose their licences if caught.

There was another thread on this but yes I agree with kford. Improving road safety is about weeding out careless drivers and most road safety measures do nothing to address that. You shouldn't have to be ten times over the limit or kill someone before you lose your licence. Any collision caused by carelessness or poor driving (no matter how minor) should lead to at least refresher driving lessons.

I think Louisa is really funny at times. I've not been around that long so might forgiven for only just figuring out what other's know already.

That's the spirit lousia :D

ha ha :D

I also supsect that Louisa is just an internet character. Not a real person at all. Too many contradictions in writing style. Louisa I think is probably a middle aged bloke in reality, trying to be a comedian but not consistant enough to fool anybody.

Surley the name doesn't matter. This is about addressing anti-social behaviour, something that impacts in many ways. If the Police do nothing they are criticised. When they do something which sounds like sensible community policing, everyone focuses on what they name the exerise.

Last weeks dispatches was on private parking companies and the culture there definitely is to issue as many tickets as possible. A common sense aproach would be to have a designated drop of/ collect point outside things like stations, with a 5 min waiting time limit. The same dispatches program made the point the the law was changed by this government so that it is no longer necessary to prove who was driving the vehicle. We have the most cctv cameras in the world and most of them are trained on drivers. So obviously a cash cow.

Vans are the reason you have goods in your shops. They are the reason you can get a plumber when you need one or a builder. Descriminating against a type of vehicle because you don't like the look of it is surely just as unreasonable? The owner of the vehicle has explained why he can't move it. So not inconsiderate at all. There may be a hundred and one reasons why he can't get it fixed as quickly as others would like. His insurance and tax do however buy him time to sort that out when he can. I really don't see a problem here.

I was responding to the post prior to mine. Can't be arsed reading through some of the curtain twitiching tripe found on this forum.

Ok so now we are at 'park outside someone else's home not mine!' What next? Don't want yellow cars parking outside? Older cars? Motorbikes? It all amounts to the same thing. Trying to claim ownership of the public highway outside your home. It doesn't belong to you.

ok so they were in a police car, and so what? Does every parked Police car have to find it's way onto a public forum? Nonsense.

Yeah. Police doing convert surveillance or protection. OP asks why they're there and is told nothing to worry about. That would be enough for most of us but not the OP who feels the need to advertise it on a public forum and blow their operation. Soome people really are stu..., no I'll stop there :D

He pays his tax, and he pays insurance. That's all that matters. If you don't want a van or otherwise to park outside your home, then buy a house with a private driveway.

Johnjohn, if the vehicle is taxed and insured, it can park where it damn well likes and for as long as it likes. If you want a guaranteed parking space outside your home, buy a house with a driveway.

I think that's true ????. There's no doubt that those who create and run the system take full advantage of it too. And all MPs of all political parties are equally guilty of that. It's abit like awarding themselves a massive pay rise whilst everyone else is limited to either 1% or have had their salaries frozen. Politicians do have a poor image and they only have themselves to blame.

Thirded. It's a public highway. He can park there for as long as he likes as long as the vehicle is taxed and insured.

Try contacting Southwark's Adult Social Care team as a starting point, as they will make an assessment and feed into available local services for you. http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200407/my_support_choices/2370/contact_adult_social_care_southwark You could also try speaking with her doctor too, who would be able to refer her to local agencies for support. There is a local Community Mental Health team on Lordship Lane, to whom her doctor could make a referral.

Looks like an upmarket bachelor pad. The kind of place American Psycho would reside at!

I am impressed that a helipad can be constructed in just one weekend. A weekend of traffic chaos is a small price to pay for the lives that might be saved by this.

'So it pervades the tory Party but not the Labour party?...only one of them's had a female leader* and that was 40 years ago, which kind of illustrates your point minus the partisan line.' Thatcher was hand picked by Airy Neave because he wanted Heath deposed. Thatcher didn't come from some great liberal drive to advance equality for women in the Tory party. She was the pawn in a clash between those two politicians. No Neave, no Thatcher. I disagree Loz. It's not chicken and egg at all. It's life. Women go through pregnancy, give birth, and some breast feed and they already have a relationship with a new born child that men can never have. And there's nothng men can do about that. Babies have a unique relationship to mothers. Nowhere in my comments can you draw the conclusion that most children being raised by women means that men don't want to be fathers. Men do not do the bulk of childcare. But nor does a man have to in order to be a father. It's true that the law favours the mother in custody cases (unless there's a good reason why the child can't be looked after by the mother), but children can't be split down the middle. It's the whole thing of pregnancy etc that gives women the edge in that repsect and yes it's crap for men who want to be custodians, but maybe it's the price you pay for having a child with a person you aren't really compatable with? (cruel thing to say I know). 'Why not? If someone brings a child into this world, is it not too much to ask for them to actually look after it?' In an ideal world yes but the fact remains that most men still expect the mother to do it all. Look at the number of absent fathers out there. Do you think all the guys at a Millwall match changed their kids napppies? It's up to us guys to pull our socks up if we want anything to change, not criticise those who say it like it is.

'I've had friends that have gone into it 50/50 and are great fathers.' You miss the point Loz. Most men do not go 50/50 with the mother on all aspects of childcare. And until that changes, men can't expect to be seen as equal in effort to women. Add to that, that 92% of single parent families are women too. That's a lot of women doing most of the work when it comes to children. And you don't have to be 50/50 on all that stuff to be a great father either. What do you guys want? All men to share childcare equally so that we as a gender can be recognised on equal footing? 'From a feminist perspective, what I've seem in my own adult life is that whenever women take on jobs formerly done exclusively by men, the job itself appears to be devalued by association. When men take on jobs traditionally done by women, it takes a lot longer for the perception of the role to change in the other direction. Either that or it's assumed more readily that it's a step to something better or only temporary.' This is true RPC, hence the quote from Charlotte Witton 'Whatever women do, they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good.' There is still a helluva lot of sexism out there, especially in corporate environments and private mens clubs, the city etc. Public schools are a great example of that, where boys schools like Eton and Harrow are hailed, but most people couldn't even name one public school for girls. And that world of privilege (which btw pervades our legal system, the tory party, the establishment etc) is a deeply sexist culture - which explains a lot, when lack of advancement of women in certain circles is concerned. Labour have been active in trying to redress the balance in their own party at least, for a while (remember Blair's babes?) and Harriet Harman has been at the forefront of that. So it's no suprise to me that she stills speaks out to the female vote for the Labour party.

Quite Otta. And I have known guys who do nothing. In some ways it's about getting your hands dirty. Changing nappies is not a pleasant thing to do, but mums have to do it. Gone are the days where someone could stay at home all day whilst the other worked. It takes two salaries to pay for a household, and that's hard work, esp for mothers.

I think Loz, that article is more a reflection of how employers treat employees these days (especially ones not protected by a union) than his reason for absence. I think he may have a good case for tribunal who I am sure would decide his absence was more than reasonable.

Do you/ have you guys changed nappies? Got the kids up, dressed them, dropped them off to school, washed all their clothes, cleaned the house, cooked their dinner, bathed them before bed AND gone to work, every day for five years? Because that's what my wife did. I helped some days, but I wasn't doing it every day. So no way would I even claim that I'm underappreciated as a father. I'd argue the opposite to be honest.