Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The link


Ah yes, porn with all the porn taken out - as Bill Hicks said, I'm not sure plot and dialogue are enough to carry these things on their own


Still - the Mail once again getting it's prurient kicks describing what the channels advertise (and not complaining about what they don't deliver )


Liking the Tacqui thing tho BBW

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186245
Share on other sites

Don't know about you, but I feel a bit sorry for the silly cow.


She's obviously married to a bit of a cheapskate, stuck up North, with only his knuckles and a mouse for company. Couldn't he tune into BBC Parliament to see his Nunhead beau and knock one out?


Bring back the Tories and some proper scandel, rather than this scrapping the bottom of the barrel for any bit of tittle tattle. oh sorry, it did cost the tax payer a few pound.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186259
Share on other sites

Listening to BBC London this morning where it was embarrasing to hear the presenters giggle like a pair of adolescent school-kids. For the whole show. Then Paul Ross got on his moral high-horse and said he himself had NEVER watched one because he considered them "juvenile". Then went back to giggling like a child


To be sure a large part of the industry is explotative and populated with spivs and dangerous men. But then so is the clothing industry.


And to listen to so many people say they "never watch" it (in the same way that when google street view came out last week everyone was outraged on behalf of the man coming out of the sex shop) - when it is clearly pretty much a huge percentage of the population. You don't drive several industries (and the fact that you enjoy a video/DVD player and using the internet is largely down to the success of porn driving them) on the back of a few sad men in raincoats


At least MPs expenses get published online from July - so from that angle we look to be covered

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186394
Share on other sites

PS to above - I'm not defending the industry in it's current state btw. Just wanted to make that clear. The clothing industry comparison is possibly glib as well but the more I find out about the reality for many participants at the coalface in both, the more I want to have them talked about
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186401
Share on other sites

cdonline Wrote:

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


> She's obviously married to a bit of a cheapskate,

> stuck up North, with only his knuckles and a mouse

> for company. Couldn't he tune into BBC Parliament

> to see his Nunhead beau and knock one out?




I think its very noble of her husband to take the rap for this and save the career of his MP wifey - I heard that it was in fact he who was not around that weekend and it was she who was at home with only a ____________ and a mouse for company.

Lets play Tacqui Blankety Blank.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186513
Share on other sites

I'm not keen on fisking at the best of times, but sometimes, if it's a long post that needs to be addressed on a point by point basis; but seriously Louisiana do you have to fisk everything?

It was just one short sentence!


Couldn't that have just read:


"Well Jacquie says we have paid for it, and she says that she's paying the money back.

But how can you say it's none of our business?"


So much more conversational.


---


As for your latter point, each of the recent cases the women in question have all been stained with their own sleaze and dubious self-interest, often following the letter (juuust) but never the spirit of the rules.


They've all also threatened to bin their men which doesn't say much about their personal integrity either does it.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186523
Share on other sites

I'm saying it's none of our business because it's prurient. If the films were all Ocean's 13 and Finding Nemo etc this wouldn't even be in the news. The only reason it's in the news is the tee-hee factor. It's cringey


A claim was mistakenly submitted, the claims dept caught it and rejected it. It was all dealt with privately as it should be. The fact that someone then leaked so we the public could go "ooh which one???" is a bit embarassing. Let's say you find out which titles - then what?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186528
Share on other sites

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> I'm not keen on fisking at the best of times, but

> sometimes, if it's a long post that needs to be

> addressed on a point by point basis; but seriously

> Louisiana do you have to fisk everything?

> It was just one short sentence!

>

> Couldn't that have just read:

>

> "Well Jacquie says we have paid for it, and she

> says that she's paying the money back.

> But how can you say it's none of our business?"

>

> So much more conversational.


Mockney...


I have a business to run, the kitchen is being ripped out as I speak, calls to clients, John Lewis, electrician, tile people to get though, seven separate deliveries of mountains of stuff (filling half garden right now), dealing with NGO board stuff, with three different depts of HMRC etc. Multi-tasking. As we women do. So morse code is as much as I can manage, as ever.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5797-tacqui-smith/#findComment-186538
Share on other sites

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...