Dogkennelhillbilly

"They have failed to create a "national interest" restriction." How do you figure this is successful in France? Water utilities are widely (if not universally) privatised there (Suez etc).

" I am contacting the police if he does this again." Did he commit an offence under the Prohibition of Photographing Dogs in Public Places Act?

I think there was a filing station at either end of the plot, actually: a Jet recently at the south end and an older one under the canopy at the north end

You've described exactly what OFWAT does - control the prices charged by Thames Water and other companies. There wouldn't be any debt if water was two quid a litre... http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/regulated-companies/price-review/2019-price-review/

"the noble acquirers of redoubtable UK firms do tend to strip the assets " Thames Water was not a redoubtable company: it was losing 1/3 of all water through leaks. The assets were so borked that ?10 billion of investment was required.

The first rule of robot shopping club is you don't talk about robot shopping club.

"if we are going to protect the NHS and education, The Treasury needs to pull in extra tax from somewhere." Privatisation also meant that the Treasury got a one-off wodge of money that it used to pay for healthcare, education and benefits (and everything else the government does), and avoided investing billions in the failing water infrastructure in London. That ?10 billion of borrowing would have had to come from the government if it didn't come from the private sector.

Gregor Fisher at DPG.

"a fatal attraction to 'strong' women in politics" Yeah, absolutely, I mean, if I think back to all the darkest times in British history, they all coincide with the period during which the two (2) Prime Ministers drawn from the female half of the population were in power. I mean, if there's one thing the Brits can't stop doing, it's handing over power and influence to women. Ffs.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I don't understand why people are disappointed > > that the suspect was charged with GBH and not > > attempted murder. They both carry a maximum > life > > sentence. What more do you want? > > Assuming its with intent (which it must be) If you couldn't show intent to cause serious bodily harm, youd never be able to make attempted murder stick. But this doesn't strike me as one of those tricky cases...

I don't understand why people are disappointed that the suspect was charged with GBH and not attempted murder. They both carry a maximum life sentence. What more do you want?

Dexter Fletcher in the Half Moon. Lisa I'Anson coming out the velodrome

I bekieve that there's a textile recycling bin at Belair Park. Don't use the one next to The Plough - it's run by a cult.

I'm usually first in line to slag off the police, but it's stupid to blame a high rate of crime on them because a) crime rates depend on far more than policing style and b) they're completely swamped and underwater due to underfunding.

Precisely. Add that to the fact that prisons are hellish, hellishly expensive, and filled with drugs.

Yes.

People don't want to hear informed insight, they want to recycle vague and unsubstantiated things they heard on reality shows while they were finishing off the last of the Vienetta. Lock em all up, it's the only language I understand.

I had 2 eggs this morning. Yesterday I had 1. If this trend keeps up, I'll be eating more than 3 million eggs a day by next May!!! (For the less perceptive: a comment on how to look at numbers).

I was robbed at knifepoint in Dulwich Park 20 years ago. Two kids took my friend's bike and cut my tyre with a Stanley knife to stop me chasing. Things are much better, not much worse, than they used to be. Mandatory sentences do very little to stop weapon carrying because - you'll be surprised to hear - the kind of people who carry weapons don't spend a lot of time reading legislation or the court reports in the local paper. They're a great way of locking up kids at huge expense, though.

I hope the repairer has enough money to cover the loss or a remarkably clear contract that absolves them from liability...

Yes.

Mm-hmmm...

DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > > > No, moving traffic offences are the likes of > > blocking stopboxes, making illegal turns, > driving > > the wrong way up one way streets etc, speeding > > offences are separate and the revenue goes to > the > > treasury. > > I see - my bad, then. > > Do councils still somehow get the money back, i.e. > is that money reallocated back to road safety, > etc, or can the government use it for whatever it > wants? In other words, do councils really have no > financial incentives whatsoever in speeding > tickets? I hope you'll forgive my scepticism :) Sorry - we are talking about Southwark here. It sold off a tenth of central London and managed to lose money. Do you really think they're capable of pulling off some intricate multistage revenue generation scheme?

All my political choices are bad and all my predictions are wrong. The time I voted Lib dem was the time they went into coalition. I will never vote Tory. I should probably have my vote taken away from me. "appalling waste and their paranoid fear of being sued that leads to arse covering, over prescribing, doling out unnecessary antibiotics etc, and about undeserving, demanding, insulting, violent 'patients'" None of that gets better with privatisation - it gets worse.

taper Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > they've denied anyone at the Perryvale was > responsible for the Tweet and have informed the > Police. What-everrrr