JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH Archives

BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH  March 2012

BRITARCH March 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: NPPF

From:

John Wood <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

John Wood <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:14:42 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (105 lines)

The present government is concerned about the nation's levels in literacy and numeracy.
 
In that case isn't it rather strange that the government is recommending people to fill up their petrol/diesel tanks to twice their normal level, to avoid fuel shortage in the case of a strike, whilst the number of fuel deliveries to the petrol stations are staying the same as normal? Simple maths would soon realise that after a given amount of time half the motorists in the UK would have all the fuel and half of the motorists would have none. Even without a strike the economy of the country would become devastated just by following the brainless government guidelines.
 
Considering, as one police chief has said, there is no shortage at present so why all the queues at the forecourts which are now backing up onto the highways causing noticable traffic problems.
 
Fire chiefs, and quite understandably, are worried about large quantities of fuel being transported and stored in jerrycans and the like. The probability of accidental fires have now been dramtically increased all thanks to our caring government. Hmm..


________________________________
From: John Wood <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Thursday, 29 March 2012, 11:13
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] NPPF

As I said in a previous email property should not be considered as an investment and building properties isn't a goal towards economic growth. The property boom of the previous two decades has blown out and was one of the major factors of the recession. The present government seems to be following a similar ethos as 'New Labour' of the late 90s by seemingly being 'New Conservative' though its heart is still really stuck in the traditional tory values of old as we saw in the budget. This government is still binkered by the polarised view that private enterprise holds the key to economic growth when clearly it doesn't as we see in the present economy.
 
My cynical view of Tory MPs has always been that they are no more than brainwashed public school boys who live within an enclosed comfy world of inane traditionalism with little understanding of the true facts of world around them. An Old Etonian world of fair play on the rugger pitch and scones with jam at tea!
 
Noel Coward sums up, in my view the Tories in his 'The Stately Homes of England' in the lyrics:
 
We know how Caesar conquered Gaul
And how to whack a cricket ball;
Apart from this, our education lacks 
co-ordination.
 
followed by:
 
Here you see
The pick of us,
You may 
be heartily sick of us,
Still with sense
We're all imbued.   



________________________________

From: peter aherne <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Thursday, 29 March 2012, 8:07
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] NPPF


Andrew, you are not cynical in any way, shape or form.  You are only stating what is matter of fact.  You only have to see how out of touch with reality this government is when you consider their views on the staple working class diet of a pie or a pasty and their crass stupidity in their advice to motorists about the storage of petrol. David, I think we should all contact our respective councils and seek assurances that there will  be an HER maintained and campaign for those councils that have seen fit to close theirs such as Merseyside (quoted by Mike Heyworth yesterday)to reinstate theirs. Best wishes,Pete.
> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 20:47:18 +0100
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] NPPF
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> On a less cynical note, one positive thing I'd note is that with both the NPPF and the woodland privatisation issue, is that lobbying/campaigning does seem to make a difference
>  
> D
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: British archaeology discussion list on behalf of Andrew Smith
> Sent: Wed 28/03/2012 20:41
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] NPPF
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should not be surprised.
> 
> I bet that there are a fair few legal minds either as MPs or advising on the
> drafting who saw an opportunity and, like the bankers, took it.
> 
> I fear that I am getting old and cynical. On the few occasions when I have
> written to my MP or the PM on matters that really concerned me the blandness
> and/or obfuscation that came back each time really did not do my blood
> pressure any good at all.
> 
> The last lot tried to sell us 'joined-up government'. This lot, its
> something like 'by the people for the people'. If you believe that you will
> believe anything. Most of us will not be able to pay the legal costs to
> challenge it.
> 
> Andrew Smith.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "PETTS D.A." <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 7:50 PM
> Subject: [BRITARCH] NPPF
> 
> 
> My thoughts about the NPF
> 
> Broadly speaking it's a lot lot better than it was threatening to be - there
> are certainly some problems (but as RESCUE have noted PPS5/PPG16 weren't
> perfect either) . Really pleasing to see HERs right in the heart of the
> process - I'll certainly be writing to the relevant Teesside councils who
> withdrew funding from their HERs to find out what they are going to do now!
> However, my main impression is of the complete speciousness of the entire
> 'slash the red-tape' agenda which was one of the driving forces behind it.
> No-one wants excess bureaucracy, but so much of the NPPF is nebulous in the
> extreme; what they have saved in red tape at this stage is nothing compared
> to the red tape and litigation that is going to take place as the
> practicalities are thrashed out in court proceedings at local and national
> level. Never mind the developers winning out of this, the real winners are
> surely planning lawyers!
> 
> David

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager