Jump to content

My Lidl Pony

RosieH

By RosieH
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

malumbu

malumbu

Posted
Posted

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

It is not the government's role to routinely test food

The world has gone mad

If we had a goverment that did routinely test food then we'd be up in arms about a nanny state

We've been here before in the late 80s and early 90s with listeria, salmonella and then later E-coli. These made people poorly and government changed the law and then where necessary tightened regulations.

By all means debate why they did not repond earlier to horse meat, and should this be something that was picked up earlier somewhere in the food chain. And how you can kick the food chain and retailers harder to get them to have better traceability whilst throwing the crooks in gaol.

And this is all rich when I see people saying, oh we can't afford decent food, when they are paying ?50 a month for an i-phone and satelite TV. I am not saying lets return to post-war austerity where most of our wage went on living expenses. Just get it into context please.

(Sorry I had to rant on-line as I was shouting a the telly again)


Going to have a beer now. I'll be closely checking the label first to make sure that it hasn't got any fish in it. Or maybe I'll try some Austrian anti freeze.


Oh good come back by the way Top Banana. Clearly you are a more measured and calmer person than me, and also my knowledge of the regulatory structure is a little rusty, although interesting to see that FSA were supposed to do more with less resource (a little bit of knowledge is dangerous). Trouble is I see FSA very different to the Meat Hygience Service(ie policy rather than enforcement), when they are the same organisation. Food labelling was also moved from the FSA back to the agriculture department (think that was the last lot) and nutrition policy went to DH where they thought it would be a good idea for the major manufacturers to dictate what is good for us so we are well on our way to returning back to pre-97 days. And FSA has had its research budget slashed.

Top Banana

Top Banana

Posted
Posted

"Oh good come back by the way Top Banana. Clearly you are a more measured and calmer person than me.."


Thank you for that kind comment.


*blushes*


I find myself at a crossroads. I'm debating whether to go all-in on financial crime with the CoL Police, with all the paperwork, book-reading and analysis that the role dictates, or to go practice the Sam Vimes ideal somewhere else.


See other posts.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • ianr
      Where can you smell Wood Burning stoves in East Dulwich

      By ianr · Posted

      Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • ianr
      Where can you smell Wood Burning stoves in East Dulwich

      By ianr · Posted

      Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • malumbu
      Advice on dealing with a solicitor who will not use modern means of communication

      By malumbu · Posted

      The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • alice
      The Pie House Co-op Deptford Emergency Crisis - Needs YOUR Help.

      By alice · Posted

      Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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