Jump to content

Recommended Posts

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> Ooooooh big congrats to all concerned. Can't

> believe you nicked Rory though. Back to the

> drawing board!!!!


I have to say the name Rory gets mixed reactions MP - especially from the mother in law (not so keen on irish names it seems). But I have always liked it and its going to be more mainstream if rory mcilroy keeps up the good work!

Were either of you new / 2nd time Dads in Mon petit cafe today about Noon? A tall woman was with you and you carried tiny lickle baby in a carry thing like a back to front rucksack (can you tell I am not a parent?) I was too shy to ask you to identify yourself!

As my the little one sill have a Spanish surname an Irish first name is non negotiable it would seem.

I like Rory, apart from being a good solid name, because a)it's also Scottish where my mums side are from and b)people can spell it.


Girls names not so good, Briony (I've some welsh a little ways back) was rejected so only unspellable ones remain.

Aoife and Niamh are front runners.

I reckon if the former I'm going to register her as Eva in her Spanish passport. If the english struggle, Spaniards REALLY will not get it!!


Anyhow, big congrats again.

  • 3 weeks later...

Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> Congratulations to Weegee whose baby is here.

> Jessica Charlotte born on 29th December @ 1315.

> Weighing 7lbs 8ozs.

>

> Can't wait to see the photos Weegee x



ah bless you Ladymuck


Yes all good here. Both Franster(Mum) and Jessie are doing fine and resting at home!

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

    • It's called The Restorative Place. Also, the Fired Earth storefront is under offer too, apparently. How exciting...!
    • Perhaps the view is that there are fewer people needing social housing in London, going forward, or to cap it as it is rather than increasing it. We already see the demographic changing.
    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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