david_carnell

I'd say Blair was an exception, in terms of religious devotion, rather than the rule. And he repealed Section 28.

I would have hoped that a centre left govt, of a mainly secular nature, and with nothing to lose in terms of opinion polls would have grown a pair and made this compulsory for EVERY child with no opt out for parents. And banned faith schools from preaching any of this cobblers about the abomination of homosexuality or sex outside marriage. But no. I soMetimes genuinely despair. This is one of those times.

Regulated? Like say....banks? As someone who has worked in both public and private sectors for large organisations I can anecdotally say that all your public sector criticisms could also be levied at Private Company Plc. And for every state run Chernobyl there was privately-run Three Mile Island. Swings and roundabouts. But I'd rather give a not-for-profit organisation the reins of a potentially dangerous power station, than one dedicated to making a profit. But it won't happen. We couldn't afford publicly built nuclear - certainly not now - and so will be reliant on private companies (from overseas) building these things with huge subsidies since they never actually recoup the money the cost to build.

skidmarks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You could say the same for nationalised > industries, they?re not exactly known for > splashing out. Really? I'd say nationalised industries, whilst having certain failings, were certainly not cost cutters. If anything the lack of strict budget and timescale leads to project failings when run by the state, not penny-pinching @MmamoraMan - I hear you and broadly I agree with you. And tbh, if push came to shove I probably would get on board with nuclear power. But, when run and built by a private company, whose sole motive is shareholder profit, I fear long-term thinking is put aside for short term gain. If less concrete to build reactor cores (or whatever) can be used I worry it will be used. "Hey, Trev, isn't this incredibly vital piece of wall meant to be 2.5 meters thick? It seems to be only 2.4 meters thick" "Oh, yeah, forgot to mention that Bob. The bosses said we're over budget and to save some dosh we're using a little bit less concrete when building this incredibly important piece of wall - but it'll be fiiiine." Tell me I'm imagining this scenario and it would never happen. Then I'd be a LOT happier.

Hurrah. Nice one. So... does this mean I don't have to get the beers after all. I reckon baby trumps job!

I guess one of the things that worries me about nuclear power is that, and as a military man mamoraman you should recognize this, is that the power stations will be built by a a corporation who put in the lowest bid in order to win. Now, is it just me, or does a company looking to cut costs to be competitive not make a particularly pleasant bed-fellow for nuclear power.

Thank you all very much. Beers are indeed on me Keef but you may have to wait till my first pay cheque! Thanks to all for your support over the recent months - it means a lot. Oh, and PGC, I doubt I'll start for a bit yet so we might get a few ends in.

Ellis is certainly a good footballer but can he place kick? I'm not sure. Lee Byrne might be a better bet in that eventuality - his left boot is monstrous. But yes, I'm sure in the event of injuries we might be able to fly someone out. Just don't let it be Charlie Hodgson! I'm worried mainly about the forwards tbh. With the exception of Habana (and he's been a bit ropey this last year) the SA backs don't scare me, but their forwards are terrifying. Botha, Spies and Burger are probably the best players in the world in their respective positions. I'm not sure any of the Lions players can claim that. I'll be watching closely. Hopefully, given the lack of time differences between us and SA some ED pubs should be showing matches.

Suspicious of MySpace? Why? It's not a social networking tool anymore (haha - in your face Murdoch!) but for music it still works well enough.

Thanks Mick. My first thoughts are as follows: Is taking only two fly-halves on a physically bruising tour not folly? Where is Tom Croft?

The new King Creosote album (or at least some of it via MySpace)

At the start of the 1972 Munich Olympics, Lasse Viren, a 23-year-old Finnish policeman from the small village of Myrskyla, was not widely known. Indeed, the heats of the 10,000 metres were his Olympic debut. But when he stumbled and fell just before the halfway mark in the final his chance of victory seemed to have gone. The Tunisian Mohamed Gammoudi (who had won the 5,000 metres at the 1968 Olympics) tripped over Viren and gave up two laps later. But the Finnish runner calmly got to his feet and chased his way back into contention, overtaking Britain's David Bedford, the long-time leader, to not only win the gold medal, but set a world record of 27min 38.4sec. Ten days later, he also won the 5,000m (in an Olympic record time) - a double that he repeated in Montreal in 1976.

According to their website: UMF Manuka Honey can help... Stomach ulcers Sore throats & colds Skin ulcers, wounds, boils Burns & pressure sores Infections & MRSA Hmmmm....

Ahh...that was SeanMac, who last year decided that the best way to prepare for such a physically challenging drinking-athletics was to fall off a pub table whilst posing for photos. I believe the physical wounds have healed.....but the emotional scars are still raw!

Sugar Ray Leonard. A natural welterweight, he was one of the boxing greats of the late 70s and early 80s. Having avenged defeat against Roberto Duran, defeated the previously unstoppable Thomas Hearns, Leonard retired in 1982 due to a damaged eye (caused by Hearns in their fight) and a lack of motivation. After retiring, Leonard fell into cocaine addiction for four years. In 1984 he attempted a comeback that was ended abruptly when he was knocked out in his first fight by a distinctly average fighter called Kevin Howard and at the post-fight press conference Leonard once again announced his retirement. Then in May 1986, Leonard shocked the sports world once again when he announced he would return to the ring for one more fight: against World Middleweight Champion Marvin Hagler. Leonard had only fought once in five years, and had never fought as a middleweight. It was only Hagler's third fight in two & a half years as he entered the twilight of a glittering career. The rest, as they say, is history:

Good work lads - I plan to compete again. Get thee behind me MacGabhan!

How very dare you! I'm far closer to a cross between a Boden catalogue model and the man from Del monte. In answer to the OP... Hmmm... Debbie mcgee when I was young but now it's the scouse redhead from girls aloud. Even if she looks like a ghostly mannequin.

Not.

Because that's what parenting is about, eh daizie - saving time. Heaven forbid people should invest time, energy, intelligence and empathy into parenting. Nah just give 'em a slap - it'll be quicker. The mind boggles.

Holy crap. What a game.

Cor! Cracker of a game for the neutrals amongst us. 2-2 now. That free kick would still be travelling now of the net hadn't been there.

daizie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Everything in moderation. My dad hit us at times, > when we deserved it, and im pleased he did. It > gave us respect for authority. It really did not > do me any harm at all and my brothers and sisters > say the same. It's phrases like this which worry about the logic being used. If every time you broke the law or misbehaved in public as an adult, the police would come and whack you round the head or wallop you on the arse with a baton would it instil a sense of respect for authority in you? Frankly, I'd begin to loathe them as authoritarians who think they are above the law. Rather than respect them I would resent them. Rather than being there for my own good I would see them as the enemy. We don't see physical violence as a method of curbing adult bad behaviour and yet it is deemed suitable and actually educational to do so to our children. And for every anecdote that will be wheeled out that "it never did me any harm" there will be the same number who could tell horrific stories of excessive parental violence that society tolerated because it "was what has always happened". I think smacking your children is only reflective of a lack of imagination and effectiveness in disciplining your children using normal methods. It is your failure, not your children's, that leads to it.

What purpose would fewer MPs serve? Would it not make the HoC less representative?

MamoraMan - I think we've discussed this idea of limited terms before and I do find it interesting. However, it does strike me that some incredibly important work is done by those backbench MPs who either never aspire to, or never reach, ministerial level. Even if we ignore all the valuable constituency work, which is essentially what an MP is meant to do - represent the constituents needs, then the role of select committees warrants attention. These are committees which look at govt. performance specific areas of dept. policy. They are staffed entirely by non-ministerial politicians who can bring vast amounts of experience to the table. Sometimes this is from outside knowledge but sometimes through longevity. It would seem unfair and rather rash to remove an effective backbench politician due to their completion of two terms when both their constituency work and committee expertise is unrivalled.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > David - the party is the squad that the team (the > cabinet) is picked from. The party picks the > leader and it picks the team and it debates the > policies. It can rid itself of the leader and the > team if it thinks fit, so I don't agree that you > can separate the two. > > If the party had Denis Skinner's policies it would > not be in power, ever. Kinnock, Smith and Blair > modernised the party. Anyone who agrees more with > Skinner than these 3 modernisers then perhaps > agrees with an outdated socialism. Mick - you misunderstand me. I'm not a supporter of Skinner et al (although his anti bankers schtick is pretty popular thesedays) but used him as an example of how the Party encompasses a wide variety of views. I disagree with my/this govt. Not because I'm some unreconstructed socialist but because, too often, they have lacked the courage to be radical and pushed a real social-democrat agenda when they could have. Coupled with some unpleasant civil liberties failures it's left me cold. However I know that a lot of members feel the same as I do and that we/they are fighting for change. I would like to see the NEC return to it's more powerful past and for conference motions to pass into policy more rountinely. Unfortunately most of this is like turkeys voting for Xmas. If you want to debate this particular point on party vs govt further PM me as it's well off the topic and I can bore you rigid with 3 years study of political party apparatus. Yawn.