ECCOnoob

Oh come off it Anna. You really do make yourself look more silly than you clearly are. You dont seriously think for one second that these extremely complex and detailed negotiations are dealt with by way of Teresa and Michael alone sitting in a room over coffee arguing the toss. She is the Prime Minister of this nation. So of course she is going to be the figurehead of them. Of course she is going to be the one who addresses the party, media and the population about them. But to seriously think that she is personally expected to have complete unilateral knowledge, directive and control of every single aspect involved in the negotiations is just ridiculous. She will have teams of advisors, researchers, lawyers and assistants involved - many of which will be those so called experts who you purport are necessary. You think Barnier is doing it all alone with his "expertise"? Maybe, just maybe, if extremists in her own party weren't undermining her every 5 seconds OR all the sore loser remainers wern't demanding that she u-turns on brexit every 5 seconds OR half the opposition benches, despite their own leader happy to let brexit slip through, weren't demanding her head on a plate just for being a tory...... then maybe, we wouldn't look so "weak" in our negotiation position in the first place. She was handed a poisoned chalice. Dont leave and that's a smack in the face to all those who voted in a referendum her predecessor created for us population who allegedly demanded it. Do leave and the losing side demand she resigns, leaves, falls of a cliff, gets stabbed in the back/front/sides by her political colleagues. Quite frankly I admire her for sticking it out this long. She has never since day one of her PM career rushed into anything. She makes decisions when she is ready to make them. She clearly isn't going to be bulled into making one now with one of the biggest decisions for 50 years. Good for her IMO.

Does not work like that Anna at all. She want not deemed capable to go to a trial. Professionals deemed her not having the physical and or mental attributes to comprehend and go through the process justly which is primary factor in the legal process. Nothing to do with trying to block her access to a court hearing. "Not allowed to defend" is incorrect. Again, it does not work like. The fact that the Defence did not have any evidence is not the same as not being allowed to defend. The law entitles her to legal representation. The law entitles her to any supportive service through the court process as they would to any other Defendant. IF no evidence was presented that likley means that either she refused to engage with it OR in the alternative there was no sufficient grounds and evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not commit the offences. That was a jury decision based on the facts presented. Given her past charges it was very likely to go that was whether she actually stood in court or not.

According to the Nottingham Post, way back in 2014 when she was just a normal free citizen she was arrested, charged and sentenced to a Community Order for starting a fire in a shed, endangering life and property damage after she thew paint all over another resident's house. Clearly Ms Shaw has form for this "starting fires as a protest" and in view of an existing criminal order she would have been picked up and imprisoned for it. What has happened since then, I concede is all a blurred mess dependant on which crackpot conspiracy blogger, vlogger, webpost or twitter stream you follow. What is clear on the latest episode is that she has started fires again 3 more times. She was assessed as mentally unfit to stand trial and as would apply to another simiar circumstances with a similar Defendant, the case was dealt with as a finding of fact trial before 12 independent jurors. The Defence showed no evidence to support and they convicted as guilty. That is not a secret hearing. That is not some government conspircacy. Its the procedure. THIS specific case was not about any whistleblowing. It was not about historical neglect. It was not about some deep dark web of disgusting individuals committing unthinkable behaviour and irresponsibilty in a vulnerable childrens home. That's for another time and what i find more disgusting is people all over the internet weakening any such allegations she may or may not have by desprately seeking some hook to attach anything and everything this woman does or doesn't do as some stick to beat against the government. THIS specific case was simply did she, beyond reasonable doubt, start multiple fires in two separate prisons and endanger life. Now, IMO she clearly is crying out for help. Mental health services need to be involved here and she needs to be out of the prison routine and into secure hospital for her own safety along with others.

Firstly, yes, you sort of did imply it when you said this in your earlier post..... Secondly, why do you think they are so rediculous? What is so wrong about a crossing indicator being put closest to the point where there pedestrians are who need to observe it. Surely its far easier to have an idicator next to someone rather than at the opposite side of a carraigeway. Puffin Crossings are also sensor controlled units which detect if a pedestrian is still present or has walked away. That stops all those times when traffic is brought to a halt for no reason as the Puffin Crossing box cancels the call if there is no pedestrian detected on the sensor. The DFT's own documents make reference to assisting visually impared people and wheelchair bound people. PS: visually impaired does not automatically mean blind, and even for those who are, these crossings have a moving tactile knob underneath the signal which spins when the crossing is on green. So, are they really such a bad thing.

Maybe DDA compliance. Visually impaired people who may struggle to see a signal at the other side of a road. Maybe wheelchair bound people who need to have the signal at a lesser height. I dont think its as simple as "grrrr... these modern ways".

As and when there is sufficient public demand for one and an issue which is of significant interest and importance for one. The Governement at that stage may deem it appropriate. There isn't any at the moment. The only people who seem to be demanding one are the people who lost the referendum about something which we have not even left yet. What do you want the government to do? Have a referendum about re-joining the EU before we have even completed the leaving process?? Dont think that makes a mockery of the system a bit. Look, I was as shocked as anyone that we were leaving and certainly didn't vote for it. But, I am also a fully grown adult who understands that we have a democracy. The majority of the voters decided leave. Those who didn't lost. Those who failed to vote at all have no argument. That's how it works.

Yes it is. There is nothing "inconclusive" about it for a start. In this instance there was only two options on the table. The vote was simple. Leave OR remain. The higher total of those eligible and/or could be bothered to go out and vote went to the leave side. Narrow as the result might have been - that is still a win. End of story.

What the hell has any of that got to do with costs of a national conference?

Yes it did 370 years ago. What replaced it as allegedly requested by the "people" was so bad that it lasted a mere 12 years before the public pleaded for the Monarchy to be restored. Grass is always greener and all that. I dont think Brenda should be too worried. ---------- Post added 14-10-2018 at 22:36 ---------- 2 minutes on Google would give you an answer. Its a question that has been done to death. I think a more interesting question would be what do the 328 uk citizens listed as having MORE wealth than the Queen do to earn theirs. At least, due to her unique position of being under pubic scruitany 24/7 since her birth, you can easily find out what the still on duty 92 year old does all day.

SYPTE probably deem it an interchange because technically you have a purpose built walkway between buses and train station and subsequently a purpose built bridge link between train station and supertram. Lets not forget a bridge link which thanks to a load of campaigning and interference by local attention seekers must be deemed a public right of way which cannot be blocked off by any sort of revenue collection or barriers. I suspect that will be enough to deem Pond Street (at least on paper) as a central interchange.

Oh my god. Stop the world someone. Business people attending a business conference get to stay in a business hotel with standard facilities. "gorged" themselves?? You mean, had meals whilst they were staying away for work, just like any other employee of an organisation would be expected to receive. "luxurious"??? Yes - it was a 4 star hotel, but so are lots of others. It was also a Jurys Inn Hotel, a chain which at best can only be deemed mid-range. Not exactly splashing out on The Ritz or a suite at the Shangri La are they. What other sort of venue would you expect to host a National Conference?? It was never going to be Mrs Miggins B&B was it. Your chosen source is totally wrong. I just searched for a room at said hotel, immediate arrival rack rate and can get prices at less than £100 a night. If we are talking about advance booking corporate conference rate the discount that organisation would get would be massive. £700?? Seems a lot of sensationalised crap to me. Talk about clutching at straws. Blogger with massive chip on shoulder makes up a load of guff to draw attention and get donations. No thanks.

Lets not confuse the issues here. This was not a case about a refusal to serve but more a refusal to print the specific message the customers wanted because it was against their belief. You really are not suggesting we give business carte blanche over who and how they serve are you. Remember to good old days of No Blacks, No Irish, No Lone Women, No Gays, No Asians..... That is not some dark age. That was less than 50 years ago. We dont want to get on the top of that slippery slope again.

Oh glory be. ANOTHER thread for a load of city bashing and whinging.

So what if they are a British Company? You are missing the point. There is only one simple question to be answered. How much tax were they compelled to pay? If that amount is NIL. Then obviously they paid NIL. What was the balance demanded by the HMRC? What profit/loss did they make? What share sales or employee dividends did they pay out? What outstanding bank liabilities, investments, loans, subsidary transfers, balancing payments did they have in place?

Really? Wow all those thousands of workers, residents, commuters, shoppers, business visitors and tourists I see wandering around every day must be a mirage. On the last figures students from both Hallam and UOS make up just over 61k out of the 575k city population. What are the other 90% doing? Does not one single one of them live or work or visit the city? Enough with these endless dramatics and exagerations. YES we have a collection of undesirables on the streets. So does every other major town and city in the country. YES people dont like to see them there. But they felt exactly the same way about the destitution on the streets 20, 50, 100 years ago. Some people need to grow up. Its a problem that needs reducing but its never going to go away. Public streets are just that. Open and accessible to ALL members of the public - even the less desirable ones. The city centre streets are not some private shopping mall that can be shuttered off and security patrolled. If it was turned into that, you can imagine the outcry from the do gooders and charity sector. Landlords cant even put anti-vagrant devices on their OWN private property without backlash from the masses. https://www.indy100.com/article/disturbing-anti-homeless-architecture-ryan-brown-twitter-8189081 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/06/council-removes-anti-homeless-bars-benches-public-backlash/ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homelessness-spikes-outside-london-flats-spark-outrage-on-twitter-9506390.html You cannot wave a magic wand to make these problems go away. Pathetic over exagerated statements like yours coupled with this prissy attitude from some people about being too scrared to go out walking around on streets that thousands of others deem perfectly safe, isnt going to help anyone.

No i'm sure it isnt "too whacky". I would even go as far as fully agreeing that something needs to be done and the whole system needs a massive shake up with major focus on simplifying. But like most opinions from the general masses, its never as black and white as they like to think. We can all say X about "UK profit". but just what is that exactly. We are talking huge multinational organisations with operations in 1001 different places, some or none of which are necessarilly defined in law as their "base". We are talking about sales from 1001 different places done either in a physical location which may well be deemed as a "UK" transaction or we could be talking about an online transaction where the customer may be in the "UK" but the sale is processed in dublin or china or singapore or even button moon. Now, does that count as a UK profit? Even if it was legally deemed to be a "UK" sale transaction, that doesn't automatically mean that is is profitable to the company who perhaps at that very moment was overall making a loss. We have an entire global world industry operating where the customer may be in the UK, goods manufactured in China, wholesaler based in the USA and sales transactions not being done by the company directly but through a member of the Joe Public acting as their own online sales agent or product distributor based in say, Ireland paying money to another company whose sole business is to take a tiny fraction of the commission of that online based muti-country involved product sale through their own offshore based subsidiary company based in the Camen Islands. So, what stripping all that apart, the question is where is the "profit" deemed derived from? What location applies? Who makes the money? What is the offset outgoings? .......This is is obviously an OTT example but the point is clear. These are the sort of complicated issues that we are dealing with here. Issues that the wider, uninformed and simplistic opinions of the masses (even even some of our more gobby politicians) never take into consideration. In other words, its just not that simple.

I am sure they do. But, this is an argument that has been done to death. We dont have a court of morals. We dont sue people and companies on what their moral decisions should be. The law is just that. Law. How much does a company LEGALLY have to pay in taxes. That's what they pay. For all those chanting how "wrong" it is- go and ask them whether they would choose to pay more than the taxman says they legally have to. Be interested to see the response. Lets get to the nub of the issue. Is it morally right? No. Does the law need changing? Probably yes. Are people free to not to use such a company to make a stand? Yes. Do they actually boycot? No - because consumers too ignore their "morals" when it suits them to get the low low prices and convenience that such global companies offer. Maybe as a business selling overseas you too should follow the advice that other companies have taken. HQ abroad and then you too could gain the benefits of these perfectly legal tax reductions. Maximise profit and limit outgoings is all what running a business is about isnt it?

I dont know. I guess that's what a consultation and proposal would be for. Perhaps they might consider something which benefits the whole city area rather than just a limited selection. If we are talking about long term future considerations "alternatives" to solve our transport problems that could mean anything from electric vehicles to ride sharing to improvements to cycling to less travelling and more home working to reopening existing (but unused) railways to hovercrafts. Who knows? The point is there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking the Question of whether it is a good investment long term to spend a hell of a lot of money on modernising a tram system that may still only end up serving the needs of a limited percentage of the city population. I suspect I would cost a lot less than having build new tram infrastructure and a brand new fleet of vehicles. You are right, many other cities and countries are investing in light rail, but that does not necessarilly mean it has to be or is even the right method for our city going forward. We have a very challenging landscape which has been a big problem when building anything from subways to road networks. For all the talk of mass expansion, the fact remains there is little room for it to go. Just look at a chaos it caused with Hillsborough to build. Can we really imagine the supertram trundling its way along London Road or Woodseats or Burngreave or all the way up to High Green and Grenoside. I am not saying whether it should be removed one way or another. What I am saying is that questions should at least be asked if the money should be spent on something better. A lot can change in 30 years. Population numbers, primary locations, working habits, commuting habits, footfall and traffic. Sticking with the status quo is not necessarilly always right

I totally disagree. Taking a step away from the knee jerk reactionary approach I actually think that a consultation IS a good idea. We are talking about an investment of millions of pounds to upgrade the network with a very vague proposal about expansion. We are talking about hugely complex and disruptive engineering works which on our terrain does not easily suit long, straight, flat trackworks that most other high capacity light rail has the luxury of having. Is it really so far fetched to ask the question about whether people want it or consider whether 30 years on there are other alternatives which are more future proof. For all the benefits of the tram, the fact is that there are huge areas of the city which are not only not covered directly by the tram but are significant miles away from its nearest stop. That's not just a small amount of the population outside its catchment but whole areas. In several areas the tram is slow, gets caught up in traffic and causes mayhem when it breaks down. For me personally, the choice between a 5 minute train journey or 25+ minute tram ride between Sheffield - Meadowhall is a no brainer. Similarly at rush hour I would be just as quick (if not quicker) getting a bus between Hillsborough and the city. Removal and replace is not necessarilly backwards as some seem to think.

Too bad he failed to do that during his election campaign. As for achievable.... Hmmmm.

Having read through it seems like all statistics its about how one chooses to interpret them. Its certainly not as back and white as made out. There are some contradictions with the report seeming to say that progress has slowed and ground to a halt but then states it is expected to increase again next year. Add on the huge range of what's causing it, dependant on what side of the political fence you are on and I think the real conclusion to be took from this is "....I dont know..." Dont think I am going to be applying for my early retirement and cashing in for the yacht just yet.

Thank you Tinfoilhat. To the other more unnecessary comments. If you choose to bring up a subject for discussion why do you think its fine to say, google it yourself. YOU start the debate. YOU provide the evidence.

Yawn. The world of work has moved on. We are 2 entire generations on from people who had sod all effect of the decline of the steel and coal industries. Those handful of morons who still blame "bloody Thatcher" for their failures need to take a good look at themselves Technological advances and global industry has evolved and we either evolve with it or die. Face facts. Most of these allegedly hard done "yoof" wouldn't be seen dead working in a coal mine or steelworks. Compo and his vile disciples are gonna do nothing but drag us back to the past.

Source? This seems to be a habit Anna. If you are going to try and start a debate with such a sensationalist headline at last provide some figures so people can see what you are on about.

Link to the Source please or it didn't happen.