Jump to content

Recommended Posts

annabel42 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Completely agree. People should not be using this

> forum to attack people who they know cannot defend

> themselves on the forum.


I must say I attack Farage, May, Johnson, Rees-Mogg and Banks quite often.


Banks is on Marr this Sunday by the way.

So because someone uses their real name when posting on public fora, they are immune from criticism?


As for whether he is unable to defend himself, he has an account with this forum and was last here on Friday - as you may well know, Admin. He's more than capable of defending himself, although his style now appears to be to threaten litigation to administrators rather than addressing the criticism openly. Unfortunately for him, you can only sue for libel if the thing being said is untrue.


I've bumped the thread evidencing what has been said. Sadly, the other forum deleted the posts in question, but you can gather what has been said from the context and there are plenty of people who read what he originally said who can bear it out. There are always ways to get hold of the original cached pages anyway.


If the man once had the courage of his convictions to stand by the vile things he at least then believed, it woukd be a shame to use censorship to facilitate whitewashing.

I?m rarely inclined to respond to anonymous trolls who misrepresent my opinions, but for you I?ll make a special exception.


a) you?re wrong about me

b) when someone?s politics differ from yours it does not give you license to disrespect them as an individual

c) your malign posts are hurting this forum


It?s not fair on admin or the community for you to indulge your personal grievances here, whoever you are, and however important you think your opinions are.


Thank you very much to those who have kindly defended me.

You appear to want to replace/duplicate things which already exist because you appear to disagree with the way they are run/your views are/have been censored.


Actually it reminds me of a petulant school kid's behaviour who can't get his own way , has a tantrum and throws his toys out of the pram.


So maybe you can use your "skills" to start your very own beachyhead.life forum rather than continuing to impose what you want/think is needed in SE22, SE23 and SE26, which to be honest ain't, ya get me.

chrisbeach Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I?m rarely inclined to respond to anonymous trolls

> who misrepresent my opinions, but for you I?ll

> make a special exception.

>

> a) you?re wrong about me

> b) when someone?s politics differ from yours it

> does not give you license to disrespect them as an

> individual

> c) your malign posts are hurting this forum

>

> It?s not fair on admin or the community for you to

> indulge your personal grievances here, whoever you

> are, and however important you think your opinions

> are.

>

> Thank you very much to those who have kindly

> defended me.


I'm not anonymous, this is my real name. I have no personal grievance against you. However I have read your opinions on this forum and on others and find you a despicable human being. Is that OK?

I think even if people use their "real name", they still feel more comfortable expressing online what they wouldn't do so comfortably in person.


I also think that if people don't like being judged on what they express online, they should be mindful of what they write online.


I am a firm believer in what you say/write being a reflection of you. Sometimes we are less than eloquent online.


Forums aren't what they used to be, however, it is 2018 afterall...

Unfortunately the 'left' have shut down meaningful discussion about anything that is not pro-EU, pro-unlimited immigration etc etc by branding anyone who expresses an opinion or cites TRUE examples of abuses of our systems in the UK, opposite to theirs as 'racist' or 'fascist'....rendelharris and others on here are those types of people, and there are many of them out in the wide world- Mr Chris Beach is very brave indeed to use his real name- I was once threatened by an extreme left-wing teacher (who gave his pupils early release from his lessons so that they could go and spread lefty propaganda to other schools!) just because I had seen through his ridiculous party lines and decided to leave his pathetic organisation....

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unfortunately the 'left' have shut down meaningful

> discussion about anything that is not pro-EU,

> pro-unlimited immigration etc etc by branding

> anyone who expresses an opinion or cites TRUE

> examples of abuses of our systems in the UK,

> opposite to theirs as 'racist' or

> 'fascist'....rendelharris and others on here are

> those types of people, and there are many of them

> out in the wide world- Mr Chris Beach is very

> brave indeed to use his real name- I was once

> threatened by an extreme left-wing teacher (who

> gave his pupils early release from his lessons so

> that they could go and spread lefty propaganda to

> other schools!) just because I had seen through

> his ridiculous party lines and decided to leave

> his pathetic organisation....



I?ve tried to have meaningful discussion with you. I?ve asked you questions and attempted to get a conversation going.


You never do anything other than a drive-by splurge of your inner viciousness, so I?ve given up.

Anytime you want to have an actual discussion I?m more than willing, always have been.


Otherwise you just look as bad as the people you attack. You might want to think about your own behaviour and ask yourself what you can do to engage with others rather than come on here periodically st ?stick it? to people you disagree with.


ETA - you don?t use your real name either, so maybe think again about your opinion of those who don?t.

Save your breath joe, throwing a hand grenade and running off is part of the far right play book. Trump does it all the time with the lies and misinformation he Tweets. By the time they get fact checked and countered the Tweets have been seen all around the world and reported on. UG's grenades of course need to be countered, but don't expect a reasoned debate with him about them...

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But uncle, you are a racist, and an Islamaphobe,

> and an antisemite, I can quote you chapter and

> verse from your posts which prove that. It's not

> shutting down meaningful discussion to call you

> out on that.


Such a pile of unadulterated BS as usual...you have made this up- as for 'antisemite' that is laughable.... and as for JoeLeg- he asks would I pay more for services when we leave the EU- since MOST of the services provided by cheap labour are unnecessary there is no reason to use ANY of them....and I spent 2 years in a lefty party and 20 years in teaching surrounded by mainly lefties and I KNOW that you are ALL intransigent and therefore I do not waste my time on countering your lying crap.....you think you have the moral highground, and you are permanent virtue signallers....As I've said- you have shut down ANY meaningful discussion by your use of 'racist' 'islamophobe' and such ridiculous extremist language...I would NEVER use my real name in this atmosphere which is as bad- if not worse- than the years I spent amongst the likes of you listening to the rhetoric being trotted out at every meeting- ANYONE with half a brain can talk the talk....

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > But uncle, you are a racist, and an

> Islamaphobe,

> > and an antisemite, I can quote you chapter and

> > verse from your posts which prove that. It's

> not

> > shutting down meaningful discussion to call you

> > out on that.

>

> Such a pile of unadulterated BS as usual...you

> have made this up- as for 'antisemite' that is

> laughable....


Yeah?


Islamaphobia: two weeks ago the charming Freya Mickleson posted "Labour has turned London into the Middle Eastern shit hole it is today. I can only imagine those who are voting to remain are supporters of terrorism & would like Sharia Law implemented into our society." You responded, "Yes."


Antisemitism: a few weeks ago someone posted that the owner of a derelict house was called xxxx but his real name was [something like] Jacob Rothstein. You posted "That last line tells you everything that's wrong about Britain and still is!" (I reported your comment to Admin and it was deleted)


Anti-immigrant/racist: September 17th, you commented "We have attracted the lowest of the low to London."


Made it up, have I? These are just the most recent examples.

Alright mate, whatever.


Amazing cognitive dissonance there.


You?re plainly a really angry person, but fury and divisiveness never solved anything. As I?ve said before, I like listening to the opposing viewpoint. My favourite online place to have my thoughts challenged is ARRSE, where I encounter of of people who disagree with a lot of what I say (and vice versa) but they?ve never descended to your level. In fact I?ve even changed my views on some stuff. Debate and discourse are good, but that?s not what you do here, and I don?t understand how you can?t quite recognise that.


I hope that somehow you find peace within you and a way to stop hating so much, because it will eat at your soul. I?m robust debater and I expect nothing less in return. But there are limits. I would note that you didn?t actually provide an answer to my question, but rather used it to make your own point.


I wish you luck, because you need it.

cn150 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Everyone should treat each other with respect and

> dignity, it?s really important for maintaining

> civility.


Sorry, I don't believe that antisemitic Islamaphobic racist bigots are deserving of respect, dignity, or civility. They should be called out and brought to account at every opportunity. We live in very dangerous times where these foul people are encroaching more and more into the mainstream of political discourse, and every decent person should stand up to them wherever they try to spread their filth, in national politics or even on such backwaters as the EDF. Respect, civility and dignity have to be earned, they haven't earned it.

Maybaby Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> cn150 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Everyone should treat each other with respect

> and

> > dignity, it?s really important for maintaining

> > civility.

>

> Yes, and some of the above posters should stop

> playing armchair psychologists.



Is that me you?re talking about? Given your earlier post that some pretty good hypocrisy.

cn150 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Everyone should treat each other with respect and

> dignity, it?s really important for maintaining

> civility.



One would hope this could always be true. Certainly there?s the idea that one should always ?play the ball, not the person?, and if one resorts to doing otherwise then it?s a default admiral that you?ve lost the argument.


Except it?s npt always accurate. As RH points out, some lines of argument are so heinous that they demonstrate the basic immorality which underpins them, at which point it?s fair to say the opener of such arguments is not worth being treated politely, as they have no intention of being reasonable.


A nasty tone runs through public debate these days, fuelled by social media and the idea that incredibly complex issues can be reduced to soundbites and easy answers, and the even more dangerous idea that if one holds a given position on spmething, then you are somehow in trenchant opposition to all other views. It?s manifesting itself in the view of human beings as somehow unequal or less valid, from whichever point of view is in play.


That?s incredibly scary, and needs to be opposed at every level and every opportunity.

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Maybaby Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > cn150 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Everyone should treat each other with respect

> > and

> > > dignity, it?s really important for

> maintaining

> > > civility.

> >

> > Yes, and some of the above posters should stop

> > playing armchair psychologists.

>

>

> Is that me you?re talking about? Given your

> earlier post that some pretty good hypocrisy.



My earlier post wasn't directed at one particular person, nor was it to continue to go off topic, as you have.


There is such a thing as literally ignoring people. Might you try it?


(I sent you a private message by mistake as clicked the wrong part of the screen).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...