ECCOnoob

Me too. I personally not had a problem However, I have to say that even being a story is just another load of keyboard campaigners. Why all the "outrage" ??? Why even is there a petition for god sake?? Waitrose's land. Waitrose's decision. There is clearly been more to this whole thing than is being said and they are even on record stating they are perfectly happy for a DIFFERENT seller to be on the pitch. The supermarket received more than 100 complaints from shoppers who claimed that they 'felt forced' to buy a copy. Mr Ross was then moved to the store's exit, where he continued to sell the publication. But he is now said to have 'flouted' that condition The supermarket insisted it had worked hard to try and come to a resolution with Mr Ross and that it would welcome a different seller on the site. A Waitrose spokesman said...."We are very supportive of the work of The Big Issue and had welcomed Andy on our site for many years, but for a number of reasons this is unfortunately no longer possible and we have agreed with the Big Issue that he work in another area..." Considering the entire store, pathways, car park and surrounding compound is all their own land I would say if anything Waitrose have been more than tolerant. Why are these 480+ people campaigning (by which I mean the big impressive act of clicking an online petition) about something they clearly know nothing about? Its pathetic. The guy has not been imprisoned or shot or sectioned. He can simply move to one of the many other places to sell his BI magazines.

Oh right, surveys and polls. Well if they are as accurate as say, the Election ones that must be true. As comic Rich Hall once said "...people who aren't savvy enough to take a wide birth when they see someone approaching with a clipboard don't have an opinion that counts...."

How the hell do you know? You been round and asked all 63 million adult residents in the UK. Stop talking such nonsense. Its getting tiresome.

Having actually READ the article and not just fallen for the sensationalist and inaccurate headline it says clearly that the proposed Order will cover a range activities deemed anti-social - including sleeping rough and begging. The councillor has said that those who are GENUINELY in need will be referred to the relevant services. However, why the hell shouldn't there be a law to prevent repeat offenders, people who refuse to use such services, professional aggressive beggars, drunken idiots and many other morons cluttering up the streets without good reason. Once again, its "outrage" and "campaigning" for the sake of it. Nowhere does it say that ALL or ANY genuinely homeless people will be fined. Nowhere does it say that the Police and Officials will be targeting just homeless people. ACTIVITIES DEEMED ANTI SOCIAL is the wording.

I am not "defending them". I have said that this firm being SINGLED OUT is very unfortunate. Many other firms in the industry have also used this accident as a way of marketing their services. There has been hundreds of blog postings / press snippets / tweets and other indirect marketing things done today from various companies and firms. All doing exactly the same. However, none of them have received the barrage of criticism that this ONE particular firm got. That to me seems very unfair. It is also, in my opinion, very hypocritical to see media outlets and other industries (including instance companies) throwing knives when they too are in the business of making a profit out of other people's misfortune. What I am saying is that if ONE is being branded "scum" "vile" "disgrace" with people screaming for their heads. ALL the culprits who did exactly the same thing should face the same criticism, some would say abuse. I work in law myself (although not Personal Injury) and I take great offence to see morons on social networks/newspaper comment pages branding my entire industry and people in it as money grabbing heartless "scum".

Another one who can predict the future. So you can tell me here and now that the rail users of 2033 will agree that its all minimum benefits. Magic you are. You are not getting it. Its not just a case of upgrading the existing network. The existing network is absolutely full to bursting. Filled with rolling stock which in turn is filled with too many passengers. NEW lines are what's needed. HS2 will create dedicated space and running lines which will allow the desperately needed top speed services. You cannot have trains that run at 80mph and trains that run at over 180mph on the same parts of the network. Eventually something has to give. Places like Manchester Piccadilly, Leeds and Kings Cross have massive congestion with trains struggling to get in on the filled platforms. As a regular rail user I have lost count the amount of times that a so called Intercity express train trundles up to Leeds stuck behind a late running commuter service. The times I have been sat waiting outside Kings Cross because there is no platform free. This is only going to get worse unless something is done about it. Upgrading what is already in place is simply not good enough. I have said before, sometimes the whines of a few affected people have to be ignored for the greater good. I bet that the Motorways, dual carriageways, tram networks, tunnels and bridges that we all take for granted now had the same fuss and hullabaloo BUT they were an investment for the future and were quite rightly built. If every NIMBY was taken seriously nothing would have ever got done.

Doubt that will happen much. There are plenty of other solicitors who will have done their own blogs/news feeds/press releases and marketing campaigns following the incident. Poor taste it might be. Bad timing yes. But the way this one single firm has been targeted is very unfortunate. As others have said, plenty of other businesses use "tragic events" to sell there wares all the time. As for the media who are stirring this "outrage" I think plenty of them ought to take a look in the mirror. Screaming outrage about a firm seeking financial gain out of a tragedy. What the hell do these bile peddlers splash all over their front pages for profit each day.

Maybe if greedy unions stopped demanding unnecessary pay rises it might stop the costs from spiralling. Seriously though, Yes 50-60 billion is a lot but how does this compare to other major infrastructure. Doesn't mean its any less needed. How much did the current motorway network or some of the recent upgrades to the WCML cost? How much is the much needed electricfication of the MML going to be? and how do these compare to the scale/size/utility and plant required for the proposed HS2.. These are all big questions which require a lot more than a lay person and lots of, in my opinion, media stirring simply stating "its too much The whole purpose of the project is not for NOW. Its not for our benefit. Just like the current motorway network and mainline rail network we use today. Just like the major developments we now take for granted such as Eurotunnel or the many local airports these were high cost long term investments which took many many years to be developed and eventually built. Its now part of our society that we use and take for granted each day. HS2 is supposed to be an investment and improvement for the future generation of rail users. Its supposed to be to create capacity on the already decaying network and finally bring them into line with something that Continental Europe has had for decades.

Millions of "ordinary working folk" use the train every day. That's one of the biggest problems which has created overcrowding. If its not "ordinary working folk" clogging up the trains twice a day, five days a week, then who the hell are all these people?? Passenger numbers have increased year on year and on the last stats at the end of 2013 over 1,268,979,546 passengers were recorded over the annual period. As for your psychic prediction on the HS2 fares being too expensive - just explain how do you know that? Can I see a list for fares please? Jeez HS2 is not even built yet. Not even finalised on paper and already people are claiming who will and wont use it. How much the fares will be. How poor the service is... God sake. No wonder this country never progresses. "why is our railways so poor" . "why is our road network crap" "why do we not get things as good as France and Germany".... people scream but then its What's that???? You need to spend money to to build it...... You are gonna have to cut down a tree or two to build it... You are going to have to temporarily cause some disruption to build it.... Arrgh! Outrageous. How dare you. Its a disgrace. Never gonna let it happen. NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY. Sometimes this place deserves the backward decaying infrastructure it has.

Funny you say that. Netto are jointly owned by Sainsburys. Aldi for example has over 9000 stores across the globe in the UK are already no6 largest supermarket chain in the UK and will likely overtake the Coop soon too. I would go as far as to say that Aldi particularly has been well established as a major supermarket for some time. To me there is not keeping anyone on their toes. Instead of giving money to one giant corporation we are simply giving it to another giant corporation - and a foreign owned one at that. God forbid! Neither Aldi or Lidl are squeaky clean with their sourcing and ethics. Both were caught in controversy just as much as the big boys, including the recent horse meat scandal. Whilst there are savings to be had, personally, I don't find either as cheap as their advertising makes out. There are in fact a lot of products from the discounters which are more expensive than in the big 4. Neither do they still provide half of the service levels that the others do. Until that day comes they will never quite get there. Fact is, that if people really want to hurt the big corporates (including the giants that are Aldi and Lidl) local and independent retail is the way to go. Budgens and other symbol groups are a perfect example of what can be done. In Ireland particularly Spar and Budgens (aka Musgrave) offer everything from local convenience shop to full blown superstore. They have the buying power through their franchisors giving them the bulk discounts BUT crucially each individual store is operated independently by a family or small partnership - money into local economy spent by local people. That is a model I would like to see more of. It happening in little stores but it would be nice to see someone have the guts to operate a full size supermarket that way. Eurospar and Superquinn as they are called in Ireland are that size. Would be great to see something like that over here.

What exactly was the complaint? Mixed retail, which is what meadowhall is, includes food retailers. Just because YOU don't like the smell of subway or sushi does not mean that others wont find it delightful. I personally cant stand coffee. I find the smell and taste repulsive. Should I be allowed to complain about the "smells" from the millions of coffee shops everywhere......NO. Talk about a drama queen. The smells certainly do not "waft around the centre" in fact you can barely get any hint once you are a few yards away. The perfume counters or lush are far more likely to leave a lingering on the back of ones throat.

What postcodes do get your approval then oh wise one?? You must tell me immediately so I can let my estate agent know without delay. God, to be seen going against your ignorantly generalised and ill informed opinion is obviously so shameful.

I used to live in London on very modest wages. Having lived in both Zones 4 and 7 with a commute to Canary Wharf during my time I am well aware what is feasible for people and what most people have to do. I never said "Central" I said Greater London. There is a difference. If you think that having a commute from a Zone 3 location to your place of work is a negative, you clearly how no idea how London works. Some of my former colleague's would have killed at that chance. Location + demand + facilities dictates what someone can charge. If councils and social housing organisations are choosing to use this private rental properties because they own supply is not adequate whose fault is that? Why should the landlord have to sacrifice below market rate just because the organisations don't have enough properties? People need to stop making out that London is this alien world where only the rich and privileged can afford to live. It simply isn't. Just like everywhere else in the world. You get the best you can for the money you can afford. There are plenty of 2 bed apartments up in Sheffield / Manchester / Leeds which come with a £1000 / £1500 per month price tag. Similarly, in certain Greater London or border locations it is actually possible to find 2 bed accommodation for as little as £600-£650 per month. Expensive? Yes - but its a Capital. What do people expect. The fact is, for all the belly aching going off about "extortion" figures suggest that around 9.2 million people work in the Greater London area. That's 9.2 million who seemingly can afford to live and have a "feasible" commute every day. They cannot all be on the poverty line and priced out can they?

Shhh... Don't be ruining this thread with facts. Its cos of greedy tory landlords init. Why? cos the daily mirror says so.

So what if he pays £1000 p/m to a "Tory Councillor". What's that got to do with anything. Rent is dictated by the location and market rate. Wandsworth is a very popular area in Greater London. If your "friend" does not want to pay much they should move. They chose the property. A quick search on just one property site shows 2500+ private rental properties under £1000 a month within 10 miles of Oxford Street. There are one bedroomed properties from 450 a month and bedsits for a little as 300 a month. Open up the travel distance a little further and there are even 2 bedroomed flat/houses falling into the <£1k bracket. Expensive? yes. But so are all other Capital Cities if you choose to live close to the centre. £300? £450? Extortionate? NO.

Well said. Its always these operations who hold the country to ransom that get away with it year after year. Just like the oh so precious untouchable NHS and the London Underground. Absolute joke. Here is an interesting line I have read in one report. Network Rail employees had received pay rises eight times higher than those of other public sector workers over the last four years and had also been offered a deal for the next four years. In 2014 the average rail worker wage was £32,500. Hardly minimum wage. Typical unions. Threating to shut down a countries rail network seems like blatant extortion on a key part of the transport network. Do this or else attitude. Ah well, ATP is already here and ATO is coming. Tick tock....tick tock..... Lets see how many machines will be badgered into paying money to be part of the RMT. Oh yeah, NONE.

Do you have disabled permit? Not sure if they entitle you to a free time. Nowhere anywhere near High Street is "free". Its a city centre not a supermarket. Best you could do its probably Talbot Street / Duke Street / South Street and walk through Park Hill and over the bridge. Either that or take the risk and Park in Decathlon/Staples and walk through town that way. If you are picking something up from a specific shop such as BHF furniture shop you might get away with loading time but I wouldn't want to take the risk.

Sod that. Would much rather have some of this.... Clearly the original and best. Maybe Scotland should be wanting to join us, not the other way round. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrogate_Spa_Water

Why? What is attaching ourselves with Scotland actually gonna do for us?

Ok, lets put a little context to your post. Firstly, £60,000 may well be a lot of money to us, but for company directors are board members in the big wide world, its a snip. Most Executive Board Members are on millions a year. Take a look at what most executive directors are on and that really would make your eyes water. Barclays Banker Bob earned 18.1 million recently, even concession for working full time, it still puts Hazel's part time salary as pocket change in fact 19x her amount if he choose to work the same amount of days. Secondly, the members voted for her and they would have been in agreement to her salary. Thirdly, its a private company funded by shareholders. Its no longer the wonderful membership union utopia it once was. In the big bad commercial world they pay market rate for who they want. If they want some useless ex labour party chump on their board to allegedly "...hold the chief executive and higher management of the group to account..." they are free to do so. Where is the "gravy train" here.

I agree with your points on Supermarkets but not the above. Personally I think for a market to survive it needs to be going the other way. Cheapest for the working masses is no longer its target. In fact, that has been dying off for decades. Supermarkets and Discount Stores fill that gap now. What the market needs to be doing is moving towards specialist / quality / premium and rare import goods. There are thousands of well paid professionals working just a few minutes away from the new market plus a mass influx of well healed foreign students living in the area. That should be prime catch for a market hall offering premium, organic, fresh, artisan, specialist goods. I have said before, just look what happens when the continental or farmers comes to town, its packed and tills are ringing. Why cant the new market be more of that. That's what I think would get more people in there. Despite what some people insist. The market is no longer for the low income, low demand person. People are not interested in going to the market for a sliced white loaf and a quarter of boiled ham. That time has long gone. What they would flood in there for is some freshly made artisan bread and some decent quality locally made cheeses which never would be seen in a supermarket stock room. Adapt or die.

What do you consider yourself to be if not part of Yorkshire????

You are not answering the question. You have just spent time complaining that despite the tories winning most votes and most seats, its all unfair. More % of the electorate didn't want them over those who did. Therefore the result is totally unfair, there should be massive reforms and more balance in the house. The people are not represented...blah blah. You have then said: I am trying to put your points into practice. Answer the question! In my area 58% of people DID NOT vote for labour and yet despite that, they took control. Based on your own comments - Is that fair?? Why should 58% of the electorate be stuck with a labour leading council they never wanted. - how should this be made more democratic?? You keep talking about devolved powers and a better democratic system. In that case, why are you seemingly against devolution to councils with a democratically elected mayor. After all, you said this right.... I really don't know what you want.

Devolved powers are coming. Its been on the conservative agenda and is already happening in other cities. Here is an interesting thought based on the recent figures. In your scenario, I could argue that Labour shouldn't have any power. 58% of the people in my constituency did not vote for them. Its totally unfair that they won and people like me don't have a voice and Labour gets control of the council. Would you agree?

From what I see so far, they don't want change. They just want "Tories out" They want "stop austerity" without any realistic ideas of how we get the country back on track and the deficit reduced. Where are all these people campaigning for for PR to be introduced. For the fifth time I ask you where were all these people campaigning for PR to be introduced and screaming about the unfair system during 2010, 2005, 2001, 1997, 1992..... As for "hardcore south" I think you need to take a closer look. There are whole swathes of Lincolnshire, East Yorkshire, Central and West Wales, Lancashire, Derbyshire, Boarders, North Yorkshire and Cumbria who are showing blue. Add to that virtually all of Devon and Cornwall turning tory which is far far away from the riches for London and SE and that's standardised response of not representing people outside the South East is horse crap. Look, I have said that I am not totally against some kind of shake up and I too have no problem with PR, I would quite welcome it. Coalitions have happened before and would happen again. However, don't let think for one second that 27 different groups should and would have balanced representation in the house without any clear leadership. That's just ridiculous. I say again, someone has to be leader.