Charge drivers and expand the cycle network



Chris Johns wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Earl Purple wrote:
>
> Part of the reported (by the media) problem seems to be that we have "the
> wrong sort of immigrants", but that could be the more media scaremong...
> reporting.

What are the wrong sort of immigrants? I agree that Britain should not
be a haven from criminals and any such criminals should be sent back to
where they committed the crime to face trial.

> There is also the phyical space issue. What if eveyone already in UK
> wanted to live in London? They won't all fit.

That would naturally sort itself out though. Property prices would be
too high. And if it does get too cramped, people will naturally move
away to where there is more space.

> Earn a living yes. Benefits should keep you out of the poverty trap, but if
> you want "luxury" things you should have to work for them.

Some assets though are necessities in looking for work. It would be
relatively hard nowadays without a mobile phone, for example

> That comment was aimed more at the indegenous population of the UK more
> than immigrants. A lot of immigrants come here wanting to work, which is
> more than can be said for a lot of the brits.

Immigrants want to come here because they think they are likely to have
a better life here than in their own country. Why should I have any
more right to a better chance life than anyone else just because I
happened to be born here?

In the same vein though, I should be allowed to go and work and live in
their countries if I want to.
 
Dave Larrington wrote:

> >> William. My commute is largely on a narrow twisty B-road, which
> >> turns unclassified for no readily-apparent reason halfway through.
> >> It's already chock-full of motorcars seeking to avoid the congestion
> >> on the M11 and A406, with a sprinkling of heavy lorries following
> >> their sat-navs.
> >
> > I am puzzled in trying to find such a B-classified road in the
> > vicinity of the M11 and the A406.
>
> Unclassified road from Broadley Common heading SW, turns into the B194 en
> route. Pretty heavily used by people heading from the vicinity of Harlow
> into London in the mornings, and vice-versa in the eventide.

The B194 classification goes up St Leonards Road at that point. B-road
classifications can be strange at times and there are no little orange
signs showing you where they go.

(I would like to see pink signs for non-primary A-roads and orange for
B-roads showing their route at all times. It makes journey planning a
lot easier).

It isn't anywhere near the A406 though, it is outside of the M25.
 
In news:[email protected],
Earl Purple <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> Dave Larrington wrote:
>
>>>> William. My commute is largely on a narrow twisty B-road, which
>>>> turns unclassified for no readily-apparent reason halfway through.
>>>> It's already chock-full of motorcars seeking to avoid the
>>>> congestion on the M11 and A406, with a sprinkling of heavy lorries
>>>> following their sat-navs.
>>>
>>> I am puzzled in trying to find such a B-classified road in the
>>> vicinity of the M11 and the A406.
>>
>> Unclassified road from Broadley Common heading SW, turns into the
>> B194 en route. Pretty heavily used by people heading from the
>> vicinity of Harlow into London in the mornings, and vice-versa in
>> the eventide.
>
> The B194 classification goes up St Leonards Road at that point.
> B-road classifications can be strange at times and there are no
> little orange signs showing you where they go.
>
> (I would like to see pink signs for non-primary A-roads and orange for
> B-roads showing their route at all times. It makes journey planning a
> lot easier).
>
> It isn't anywhere near the A406 though, it is outside of the M25.

True, but I think most of the traffic on it in the morning is using it to go
through Waltham Abbey and thence to the A406 at Chingford, rather than sit
in a queue where the M11 comes down to two lanes and then sit in another one
on the North Circ.

I sometimes drive home that way and the clockwise A406 at that point is
always full.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
It would appear apparent, to me at least, that dinosaurs were
largely burrowing creatures.
 
Paul Boyd wrote:

> Chris Johns said the following on 01/12/2006 10:51:
>
> > Scrap the ID card farce.
>
> Has anyone actually said yet how ID cards will prevent terrorism? (Which
> is their stated purpose) Perhaps there's a question on the application
> form: "Are you a terrorist? - Yes/No"

It's already been done... The visa waiver form you (used to?) use to
enter the USA has a whole string of questions, including (IIRC) are you
a terrorist, are you a communist, have you ever been arrested, and
others. It appears that this is to make it easier for the authorities
to imprison or deport you if they don't like you, because it's much
easier to do if they can show that you lied on the form - an automatic
federal offence! Note that the 2nd question is 'have you ever been
arrested', not have you been convicted, or even charged, just arrested.
This makes it quite difficult for a significant fraction of the UK to
enter the USA legally.

TL
 
The Luggage twisted the electrons to say:
> It's already been done... The visa waiver form you (used to?) use to
> enter the USA has a whole string of questions, including (IIRC) are you
> a terrorist, are you a communist, have you ever been arrested, and
> others.

IIRC, the "Enhanced Security Vetting Form" as used by HM Government has
the following set of questions :-

Have you ever engaged in:- YES NO
* espionage [ ] [ ]
* sabotage [ ] [ ]
* terrorism [ ] [ ]
* acts intended to overthrow parliamentary democracy [ ] [ ]

.... it then goes on to say "Your answers will be treated in the strictest
confidence" (which I can believe, afterall who else will MI5 have to
tell!) "and will not necessarily affect your chances of getting a
security clearance".
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
 
Alistair Gunn said the following on 05/12/2006 15:32:

> IIRC, the "Enhanced Security Vetting Form" as used by HM Government has
> the following set of questions :-
>
> Have you ever engaged in:- YES NO
> * espionage [ ] [ ]
> * sabotage [ ] [ ]
> * terrorism [ ] [ ]
> * acts intended to overthrow parliamentary democracy [ ] [ ]

Well, I feel so much more reassured that HMG is asking the right
questions. I wonder if they've ever considered the possibility of...

....wait for it...

....lying :)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
"Paul Boyd" <usenet.dont.work@plusnet> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Alistair Gunn said the following on 05/12/2006 15:32:
>
>> IIRC, the "Enhanced Security Vetting Form" as used by HM Government has
>> the following set of questions :-
>>
>> Have you ever engaged in:- YES NO
>> * espionage [ ] [ ]
>> * sabotage [ ] [ ]
>> * terrorism [ ] [ ]
>> * acts intended to overthrow parliamentary democracy [ ] [ ]
>
> Well, I feel so much more reassured that HMG is asking the right
> questions. I wonder if they've ever considered the possibility of...
>
> ...wait for it...
>
> ...lying :)

I think US immigration are reputed to ask similar questions, and have a
distinct sense of humour failure when it's pointed out how stupid they are
("Do you intend to overthrow the US govmint" type thing)

cheers,
clive
 
Paul Boyd twisted the electrons to say:
> Well, I feel so much more reassured that HMG is asking the right
> questions. I wonder if they've ever considered the possibility of...
> ...wait for it...
> ...lying :)

Who can say? However a "friend of a friend" allegedly ticked [yes] to
all the questions to see what would happen. He apparently got bollocked,
handed another form and told to do it properly this time ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
 
Alistair Gunn said the following on 05/12/2006 19:40:

> Who can say? However a "friend of a friend" allegedly ticked [yes] to
> all the questions to see what would happen. He apparently got bollocked,
> handed another form and told to do it properly this time ...

Brilliant! So even if you own up to being a terrorist, they won't
believe you!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
Alistair Gunn wrote on 05/12/2006 19:40 +0100:
> Paul Boyd twisted the electrons to say:
>> Well, I feel so much more reassured that HMG is asking the right
>> questions. I wonder if they've ever considered the possibility of...
>> ...wait for it...
>> ...lying :)
>
> Who can say? However a "friend of a friend" allegedly ticked [yes] to
> all the questions to see what would happen. He apparently got bollocked,
> handed another form and told to do it properly this time ...

If that was the US form, I suspect its apocryphal. I know people that
have had their passport stamped "Access Denied", banning them
permanently from the US, and sent home on the next flight for far more
trivial "jokes". Don't be tempted unless you never want to go there again.

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
 
Tony Raven said the following on 06/12/2006 08:26:

> If that was the US form, I suspect its apocryphal. I know people that
> have had their passport stamped "Access Denied", banning them
> permanently from the US, and sent home on the next flight for far more
> trivial "jokes". Don't be tempted unless you never want to go there again.

Sounds like a plan with no drawbacks to me :)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
In article <[email protected]>
Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alistair Gunn wrote on 05/12/2006 19:40 +0100:
> > Paul Boyd twisted the electrons to say:
> >> Well, I feel so much more reassured that HMG is asking the right
> >> questions. I wonder if they've ever considered the possibility of...
> >> ...wait for it...
> >> ...lying :)
> >
> > Who can say? However a "friend of a friend" allegedly ticked [yes] to
> > all the questions to see what would happen. He apparently got bollocked,
> > handed another form and told to do it properly this time ...
>
> If that was the US form,

.... then it probably wouldn't have mentioned Her Majesty's Government
....
 
Rob Morley said the following on 06/12/2006 11:11:

>> If that was the US form,
>
> ... then it probably wouldn't have mentioned Her Majesty's Government

Haven't the US taken over the Royal Family yet?

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
> I wonder if they've ever considered the possibility of <snippity> lying

That's why it says "Your answers will not necessarily affect your chances
of getting a security clearance". That means they won't believe you told
the truth even if you answer 'No' to everything.
 
In news:[email protected],
Paul Boyd <usenet.dont.work@plusnet> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> Rob Morley said the following on 06/12/2006 11:11:
>
>>> If that was the US form,
>>
>> ... then it probably wouldn't have mentioned Her Majesty's Government
>
> Haven't the US taken over the Royal Family yet?

I thought they were a wholly-owned subsidiary of Deutschland GmbH.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Barley, barley, barley, world cruise. You never see a farmer on
a bike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Careless driving conviction instead of dangerous driving charge
Replies
8
Views
511
UK and Europe
Tony Raven
T
B
Speeder in charge of road safety!
Replies
8
Views
316
UK and Europe
Colin McKenzie
C
E
Oh well, time to pack up the summer clothing, and charge my lights.
Replies
8
Views
429
UK and Europe
audrey
A
C
159mph speeding charge PC cleared
Replies
47
Views
2K
UK and Europe
Nick Kew
N
F
Blair puts habitual speed criminal in charge of 'road safety'.
Replies
29
Views
809
UK and Europe
dkahn400
D
Top Bottom Back