david_carnell

I wouldn't fancy trying to steal the first one either. A concrete cast of a seqoia trunk?! Can't say I like any of them tbh.

I'd echo BB's comments and wonder if when (and if) the second bar opens it might be nice to keep it as a child-free area for those looking for a bit of respite from families. A massive advantage for a pub to have that extra space. And I say that as someone who dragged a sprog along on Sunday....

I used a place next door/part of the STA travel centre by Victoria Station. No problems. Efficient and friendly service.

Fair enough. I thought his win against Trout was pretty good. Trout's skill is underated and Canelo did well. I wonder if he has the stamina though. If his tactic is to use that extra weight, lean on Floyd, and tire him then he needs to be sure he has the engine for the latter rounds.

I'll be fascinated to see if Canelo does weigh-in that heavy on the night. That's big.

So, the big money fight is upon us. I've not read anywhere how Alvarez is faring boiling down to the weight necessary. Is weigh-in tonight, tomorrow morning or just before the fight? Could have a big bearing on things and how drained Alvarez is. Mayweather schooled Guerro on his last outing and showed little ring-rust or signs of age. Even at 36 people say he trains as hard as ever. The consumate professional. You might not like him but he is supreme. But....I just have a feeling about this one. Alvarez is mean, hits hard, keeps coming forward and isn't a one-trick pony like Hatton was. He bobs and moves like Tyson used to and is also hard to hit. It's going to be close. Neck on the line, Alvarez win by TKO in the championship rounds.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Q7 Which of the following Labour MPs sent their > kids to local schools? > > a) Dianne Abbot > b) Tony Blair > C) Harriet Harman > Ah, sadly that's a fail Quidsy. A good grammar school boy knows that Q6 follows Q5. Off to the Technical Modern and double metalwork for you.

The following 11+ exam sample questions might be helpful to get your child started. Q1. Please define "hot-housing" Q2. If Johnny has to travel 1 hour 15 mins each way to school 5 days a week, 36 weeks a year, how many hours of his life will have been spent on public transport by his GCSEs? Please show your working and round to the nearest 50 hours. Q3. You are earning minimum wage. A tutor costs ?25 p.h. How many meals will you have to miss to get afford enough sessions to get your child into a marginally better school on the other side of London away from their friends? Q4. Multiple choice. Finish the sentence. "I don't want my child to mix with children outide their narrow ability bracket because...." a) stupidity is contagious b) I can't afford public school c) have you seen Educating Yorkshire?!

That is interesting. I read the "French children don't throw food" book (well most of it) since that, initially, was exactly the sort of child I quite wanted: one who could sit quietly in a cafe or restaurant; one who would happily play with on their own initiative and who was well behaved in public. I'm not sure I would have ever used the word obedient, mind you. Nor would I ever resort to corporal punishment to instill that behaviour. Likewise, as a child, teen and adult I would want my son not to accept the status quo, challenge authority and follow their own minds rather than be swayed by the opinions of others. Unlike this artile though, I'd don't see those as opposing positions. Mind you, I have no idea how to reconcile them!

Yes, vested interests etc. Although presumably the manufacturers of the panels would be raking it in.

What would be the burden on: a) housebuilders and b) housebuyers if new regulations stated that every new build home in the country had to have solar panels?

He moved to Herne Hill. It's the greengrocer along from the station. Much bigger space - good produce.

I think Franklins Farm Shop sells Volcano coffee but not sure they have beans as well as ground.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > More irony in that the FRench are going for it and > we're not? > > What would be the English equivalent of freedom > fries? > Pacifist pies? On a more serious note, this comes from one of my preferred commentators on international affairs: There is one good reason for the UK to respond, despite what Parliament decided on Thursday night. This is because Bashar used chemical weapons ? a uniquely horrifying weapon, which the international community has outlawed. This is a difficult argument to accept. Why should there be a difference between a chemical weapon and anything else? Surely what matters is only the number killed, and we should be ?neutral? on what technology is employed? No. The Laws of War, which we have developed slowly since the early Middle Ages, are based on the principle that certain acts, regardless of the number of casualties, are intrinsically abhorrent. Critics point out that this system can be piecemeal, subjective, and inconsistent. War continues to be hell: and there are many particularly horrifying weapons? such as cluster bombs ? which remain in use. But that is an argument for widening the circle of what is prohibited, not narrowing it. Take land-mines. Of course, you can kill more people with bullets or even machetes. But the banning of landmines, because of their indiscriminate barbarity, has been an important victory for civilisation. We were right also to ban chemical weapons, and nuclear weapons, not because of the number people they kill but in part because of their dispersal, their potential, and their method of killing. This atrocity is an opportunity to reinforce the international condemnation of chemical weapons. Even Iran has condemned the attack. Regardless of the vote, we should still work to ensure that countries like Brazil and India take a much stronger position of condemnation. The Syrian regime?s apparent use of this unholy weapon, shows a willingness not just to ?cross red lines?, but also to flout international law, which is terrifying in its implications for their people and the region. The international community should, I believe, respond, but its response must meet three conditions. First, it should not make the situation in Syria worse for the civilian population. Second, it should seek to deter Bashar from ever using chemical weapons again. Third, even if it fails to do that ? and it may ? it should send a clear message to deter any other regime, which is tempted to use chemical weapons. Britain has learned the lessons of Iraq, but it?s in danger of overlearning them. The alternative to grand interventions should not be simply inaction.

Seemingly it does exist but not in a useful way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing Would you want to test it? The sensation of submerging your lungs in liquid makes my toes curl.

I was under the impression Coulson never underwent DV clearance but instead was subject to just the 2nd tier SC or SCE clearance level.

If you want a cooking idea you could go to Books for Cooks in Notting Hill. They do cookery demos at lunchtime where you get a great feed for not much money.

Or the Gatwick Express. Or any fare in the north outside a major city.

Afternoon tea at Sketch is pretty cool. Is she's a bit EMO then Viktor Wynd's Little Shop of Horrors in Hackney is amazing...though you won't buy much at their prices it's an amazing place to window shop. Some street food at Kings Cross perhaps - something the 'burbs don't have. A walk, people watching, along the South Bank inc. Tate Modern?

Dulwich Woods primary school runs many sessions in the woods....

Why did this school close in the first place? And when? Newer schools have opened nearby (i.e. "new" Bellenden School) whilst this has remained dormant. A very odd state of affairs. Carnell Jnr will turn four in 2016 so would be a candidate for the first reception class if this goes ahead. Is the plan to renovate the existing building rather than demolish and rebuild, like Harris on Forest Hill Rd?

I don't think it grows on trees, I just think it should be spent on helping people with the cost of living. Travel-to-work costs seem a sensible way of helping those of work but still struggling. But if you want to talk hard facts and figures, I'm game... Increasing use of the railways isn't a ringing endorsement of the success of private railways, it is a result of the increasing congestion on our roads and many (young esp.) people abandoning their cars. A recent academic study shows that long-distance rail travel in the UK now costs 0.49p per km. This compares with 0.28p per km in Germany, 0.22p per km in Italy and 0.15p per km in France. It is also nonsense to suggest that investment in railways has increased under private ownership. In the five years prior to privatisation, investment stood at ?3.2bn at 2012 prices. In the five years from 2008 to 2012 investment slumped to ?1.9bn. British Rail ran the national network for a subsidy amounting to less than ?1bn ? and that subsidy was falling as the economy improved. Privatisation has seen the annual subsidy bill top ?5bn during the many crises that followed the fragmentation of the system. And this was when the economy was booming. Today the subsidy stands at around ?3bn. This does not feel like a success story to me. If all unnecessary costs that fragmentation and privatisation have imposed on the rail industry were eliminated, and the resultant savings were used to reduce fares, it would equate to an across-the-board cut in rail fares of 18%. That's close to the tax-break I was mentioning...

Ok - so I ask again....what would you do? Fares are too expensive, infrastructure creaking and TOCs are a joke who cream of tax payer subsidies to shareholders. I'm all ears...

Gosh - it's been what, a month, since you last mentioned the good old money tree? Firstly, I'd suggest that the nudge theory that is used on cycle scheme tax breaks can be equally as valid on public transport. If it got people out of cars then the wider benefits are clear. Also, cycle scheme tax breaks are universal and not means tested so I don't see why this would be different. I've already shown that it could just as likely pay for a miniumu-wage cleaner's bus fare as it does a stockbroker's Surrey commute. Universality also has the benefit of investing everyone using the service with a stake in ensuring it runs well. Secondly, on the issue of funding, it is no different to any other spending decision. Is this important or worthy enough to divert funding from elsewhere. I'd say yes. I'd also happily see an increase in road tax, petrol or other "eco-tax" to fund it. Thirdly, I'm suggesting it as a political vote winner by helping those suffering from excessive fare rises yet again. See today's BBC report. I will ask again though. If not this, then what? No one else has suggested any method for helping tackle the cost of rail fare increases.

I saw one up in Dulwich Woods on Sat. Very beautiful although until now I didn't know that's what it was. Lepidoptery 101.