Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Foxy, there is no human right to exercise.


http://echr-online.com/


Maybe you could try reading a bit about the European Convention on Human Rights, as you are clearly interested in these things.


The thing about the state incarcerating prisoners (or anyone else for that matter), and not letting them out to exercise (walk around a bare yard) is that it is likely to be inhuman treatment. Banging a dog up in a room 24/7 is also frowned upon.

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> Foxy, there is no human right to exercise.

>

> http://echr-online.com/

>

> Maybe you could try reading a bit about the

> European Convention on Human Rights, as you are

> clearly interested in these things.

>

> The thing about the state incarcerating prisoners

> (or anyone else for that matter), and not letting

> them out to exercise (walk around a bare yard) is

> that it is likely to be inhuman treatment.

> Banging a dog up in a room 24/7 is also frowned

> upon.


LD..


Why do people here take everything so literal (taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or exaggeration.)


They are throw away statements... Meant to be taken with some literary license.


IE. Every time I go out I get soaking wet. reply: I know what you mean. :)


Not actual fact.


I suppose it is difficult to understand the intention of the written word.

The same conversation spoken with vocal inflection would give more understanding of true intent.


DF

Snide remarks about prisoners' human rights, adding to already widely perceived misinformed stereotypes, is not my idea of a joke.


Being a justice and equality bore, I took it upon myself to counter your ignorant prejudice in a vain attempt to educate you and others of your ilk, as to the facts relating to Human Rights.

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> Snide remarks about prisoners' human rights,

> adding to already widely perceived misinformed

> stereotypes, is not my idea of a joke.

>

> Being a justice and equality bore, I took it upon

> myself to counter your ignorant prejudice in a

> vain attempt to educate you and others of your

> ilk, as to the facts relating to Human Rights.


What are you talking about. 'Snide remarks about prisoners' 'your ignorant prejudice'

Are you drunk. ??


I was stating 'Prisoners have rights.' I did not mention rightly or wrongly.


You said. 'Foxy, there is no human right to exercise.'


Well there should be. For prisoners AND children.


See you describe yourself on Twitter as.... "I'm an uncompromising, revolutionary, eco-warrior"

That would explain a lot. :)


DF

DulwichFox Wrote:


....


> No.. could not be a prison as lack of exercise

> space would be against Prisoners Human Rights..

> Kids do not have rights.. do they. ?

> Get my point. ?

>

> DF.



I got your point Foxy. Prisoner's are are given more priority than children. They have a human right to exercise, but children don't.


It was a point based on misconceived ideas about what human rights are and playing to ill-informed stereotypes of what the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act mean.



As it happens, I think schools should have lots of space for children to run around and I don't beleive this site will provide that. But the priority in our privatised education system, is not the well-being of the chidlren, but the profit of the organisations who now sell education to local and national governments.

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> DulwichFox Wrote:

>

> ....

>

> > No.. could not be a prison as lack of exercise

> > space would be against Prisoners Human

> Rights..

> > Kids do not have rights.. do they. ?

> > Get my point. ?

> >

> > DF.

>

>

> I got your point Foxy. Prisoner's are are given

> more priority than children. They have a human

> right to exercise, but children don't.

>

> It was a point based on misconceived ideas about

> what human rights are and playing to ill-informed

> stereotypes of what the European Convention on

> Human Rights and the Human Rights Act mean.

>

>

> As it happens, I think schools should have lots of

> space for children to run around and I don't

> beleive this site will provide that. But the

> priority in our privatised education system, is

> not the well-being of the chidlren, but the profit

> of the organisations who now sell education to

> local and national governments.



So in essence we agree.. Not suitable.. and profit being put before well- being.


Human rights is a misconceived term. It can be open to abuse.

I'm not sure if people who abuse the rights of others are entitled to them themselves.


I would prefer to use Humane Rights The right for all people to be treated Humanely.


DF

From the European Convention on Human Rights:


Article 3 ? Prohibition of torture


No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.



Read the actual documents I posted above instead of swallowing tabloid hysteria and then tell me they are misconceived. I sepcialise in human rights law in an immigration context and see all kinds of bollox printed in the maintream media that is inaccurate and in some cases libelous about our clients, lawyers and Judges.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25950599


Don't believe the hype.

I'm with you, Davey! Still waiting for an answer from James.

Meanwhile, take a look at the Anti Academies Alliance website, under Resources: Harris Federation- Spotlight on Sponsors. It makes interesting reading for anyone disturbed by the apparently unstoppable Harris.

Hi dds29, Davey,

I havent spotted your question - I cant patrol the forum!


Harris Federation is a registered charity. If anyone has evidence of wrong doing please tell the Charity Commission. Posting things on anti academy websites if real evidence of wrong doing exists without going to the charity Commission is socially irresponsible.

Dulwichfox and Ladydeliah,


PLEASE do us all a favour and PM each other from now on (or start another thread somewhere else) if you would like to continue your mindless debate about each others posts or human rights etc etc. It is not related to the subject of this discussion thread.

XIX Wrote:

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

> Dulwichfox and Ladydeliah,

>

> PLEASE do us all a favour and PM each other from

> now on (or start another thread somewhere else) if

> you would like to continue your mindless debate

> about each others posts or human rights etc etc.

> It is not related to the subject of this

> discussion thread.


And you are ??? 4 posts ??


When you have been here a little longer, you will realise most Threads have a tendency to drift off topic.

Just as in normal conversation where one topic of conversation leads to another.


Have a nice day.


Foxy.

Otta Wrote:

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

> singalto Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Hw said he wants the ED police station turned

> into

> > a school which I find silly as I can't see how

> the

> > site can be big enough.

>

>

> That's exactly what I thought.


Interesting that long before foxy said he thought the site was unsuitable others had already said so..

and others agreed.. (See Above)


BUT as soon as Foxy said so.. then the abuse started...


My off topic comments came about from those comments of criticism aimed at me....


Once again people resorting to have a pop at Foxy.



DF..

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> XIX Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Dulwichfox and Ladydeliah,

> >

> > PLEASE do us all a favour and PM each other

> from

> > now on (or start another thread somewhere else)

> if

> > you would like to continue your mindless debate

> > about each others posts or human rights etc

> etc.

> > It is not related to the subject of this

> > discussion thread.

>

> And you are ??? 4 posts ??

>

> When you have been here a little longer, you will

> realise most Threads have a tendency to drift off

> topic.

> Just as in normal conversation where one topic of

> conversation leads to another.

>

> Have a nice day.

>

>


So just to be clear, the more posts you've made on this forum, the more relevant your posts are? Ron70 thinks this doesn't make sense!


Ron70 (not very many posts, therefore, clearly irrelevant)

Ron70 Wrote:


> So just to be clear, the more posts you've made

> on this forum, the more relevant your posts are?

> Ron70 thinks this doesn't make sense!

>

> Ron70 (not very many posts, therefore, clearly

> irrelevant)


Nothing to do with relevance..

Was explaining to XIX that threads do have a tendency to drift off subject.

That was all. No need for another debate.


DF

Fox with a victim complex!


I, as you so kindly highlight, questioned whether there would be enough space, because looking at the building it's hard to picture how big the site really is. I have since been told that it's similar to Heber, in which case I'd say it's big enough.


Even if it is on the small side though, you basically suggested that it would be a breach of the children's human rights as they wouldn't have ample exercise space, as if they were on lockdown and unable to access other local facilities. That is why people jumped on your posts, because they were over the top.




Aaaaanyway, instead of talking about "foxy" as you call yourself (which is a bit odd by the way), lets just talk about the proposed school, and RELATED topics, as opposed to a debate on human rights, which has nothing to do with this thread. There is going off topic, and there is going WAAAAAY off topic.

Otta Wrote:

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

> Fox with a victim complex!

>

>>

> Even if it is on the small side though, you

> basically suggested that it would be a breach of

> the children's human rights as they wouldn't have

> ample exercise space, as if they were on lockdown

> and unable to access other local facilities. That

> is why people jumped on your posts, because they

> were over the top.

>


On the contrary .. That is not what I suggested.. I light heartedly suggested it could become a Prison.

and then suggested No. That would be considered against Prisoners Human Rights. Not children.

>

>

> Aaaaanyway, instead of talking about "foxy" as you

> call yourself (which is a bit odd by the way),


Why is that odd .. It's a reference to my username and what most people here call me..


DulwichFox

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Ron70 Wrote:

>

> > So just to be clear, the more posts you've

> made

> > on this forum, the more relevant your posts

> are?

> > Ron70 thinks this doesn't make sense!

> >

> > Ron70 (not very many posts, therefore, clearly

> > irrelevant)

>

> Nothing to do with relevance..

> Was explaining to XIX that threads do have a

> tendency to drift off subject.

> That was all. No need for another debate.

>

> DF


This will be my only comeback, the reason I feel the need to respond is that you seem very keen to attack others:

(And you are ??? 4 posts ??)

but then take offence when anyone questions anything you say? Referring to yourself in the third party is also a little strange..

Third Party famous quotes..


?A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new.? - Albert Einstein


If it was good enough for Einstein , it' good enough for me..


DulwichFox or Foxy is Not my actual name so can only be refered to in the Third Person.


When I reply or send PM's I use my real name and I.


People still refer to me as Foxy.


What can I do ? :)


Right that is the last I will post on the matter.


DulwichFox.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Yes LondonMix. Department of Health so painful

> (excuse the uninended pun) that we've had to find

> alternative sites.

> First permanent one found, just need to find

> second permanent site.

>

> Saying that I still hope the temporory Primary

> school site will be the Dulwich Hospital.


Thanks for the update James.

Against the realm of possible outcomes, the fact that this will become a school is great, all things considered.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi dds29, Davey,

> I havent spotted your question - I cant patrol the

> forum!

>

> Harris Federation is a registered charity. If

> anyone has evidence of wrong doing please tell the

> Charity Commission. Posting things on anti academy

> websites if real evidence of wrong doing exists

> without going to the charity Commission is

> socially irresponsible.

Oooh! Hit a nerve there did I James? Still unclear why Harris 'came up trumps.' Were there any other applicants?

Hi dds29,

Apologies I thought I'd made it clear that I approached a number of school providers locally. The only one interested was Harris. Since then, it was two years ago, others are now interested in doing this sort of thing hence Belham.

Hence why Harris came up trumps.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

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...