Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun May 17, 2026 20:07

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 07:25 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Draco wrote:
Scrap the £75 Billion (and rising) commitment to Trident Gordon!
WE are NOT a world power anymore! WE CAN'T afford it!


But Nuclear Weapons are our ticket to the top table in world affairs; the very bedrock of our special relationship with the United States of America. The special relationship that gave us so much assistance in the defence of the Falkland Islands. Without a nuclear deterrent we would be merely a small and insignificant European nation like Germany or France, unable or unwilling to wage war in Iran or Afghanistan.

You might detect a hint of irony there but, seriously, it was your beloved old labour Prime Minister Atlee and Foreign Secretary Bevin who committed us to an "independanT2 nuclear deterrent. To quote the latter in 1946 "We have got to have this thing over here whatever it costs... we have got to have [a] bloody Union Jack on top of it."

Quote:
Oh! and BTW. Get out and let Old Labour back in! You're not our kind anymore.
.....and you tories? I wouldn't vote for you if that were the only option!


You know very well that "Old Labour" is dead and buried. Its natural constituency has been destroyed, or rather exported to the Far East, by twenty five years of right wing economic policy. Even if John Smith had survived and become Prime Minister in 1997 , he would, with his Gaitskellite leaning, have moved the part to the right. (It was Smith who removed the trade union block vote at the labour conference). But not as far as Blair. I doubt that Thatcher would ever have considered Smith as her greatest legacy as she does Blair.

But even a return to the "Old Conservatives" of my youth would be better than either of our two min parties now :(

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 08:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Draco wrote:
Right! Unaccustomed to plain speaking as I am, and being of an "Old Labour" mind......

Where the Hell are these cretins coming from? Not from the Labour party that I knew, that's for sure!


The Conservative party?

Brentwood, in which this parish is, is nearly 100% Consevative, I can't imagine the parish council is a hotbed of reds either.

Brentwood Borough Council has the current political make up:

Conservative 28
Liberal Democrat 6
Labour 2
Independent 1

Why oh why if people see an article in the Daily Mail criticising a council do they assume it's a Labour council?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 09:20 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
The problem is not the elected persons, it's the ones who are there come-what-may.
Particularly, in "town halls". Since they are now run by commercial management teams.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 09:43 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Quote:
jomukuk
The problem is not the elected persons, it's the ones who are there come-what-may.
Particularly, in "town halls". Since they are now run by commercial management teams.


Too right. We got rid of a Labour council that had been in for ever and a day. They were totally destroying the road network round here with loads of un neccessary traffic lights and lower speed limits. Whats changed with two years of a tory council....absolutly nowt! It's still the same morons in highways planning with the same un workable ideas.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 13:29 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Draco wrote:
The roads in Germany are like billiard tables...........even the little country lanes!

....

You're right.
I've cycled plenty of the back roads around Munich, I remember being surprised at the quality of their back roads. Only now that you mention it do I make the comparison with our own crappy back roads. Granted much of Germany had to 'start again' after the world unpleasantness, but decades later they’re still in great shape. It's not like uK drivers don't pay for the upkeep of UK roads, so what gives?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 13:51 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 00:01
Posts: 2258
Location: South Wales
Steve wrote:
I've cycled plenty of the back roads around Munich, I remember being surprised at the quality of their back roads. Only now that you mention it do I make the comparison with our own crappy back roads. Granted much of Germany had to 'start again' after the world unpleasantness, but decades later they’re still in great shape. It's not like uK drivers don't pay for the upkeep of UK roads, so what gives?


Some parts of britain had to "start again" too. Coventry for one. Look how well that turned out.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 14:19 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
Lum wrote:
Steve wrote:
I've cycled plenty of the back roads around Munich, I remember being surprised at the quality of their back roads. Only now that you mention it do I make the comparison with our own crappy back roads. Granted much of Germany had to 'start again' after the world unpleasantness, but decades later they’re still in great shape. It's not like uK drivers don't pay for the upkeep of UK roads, so what gives?


Some parts of britain had to "start again" too. Coventry for one. Look how well that turned out.


Maybe that's why the saying "sent to Coventry" came to mind :)

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 16:14 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
dcbwhaley wrote:
Draco wrote:
Scrap the £75 Billion (and rising) commitment to Trident Gordon!
WE are NOT a world power anymore! WE CAN'T afford it!


But Nuclear Weapons are our ticket to the top table in world affairs; the very bedrock of our special relationship with the United States of America. The special relationship that gave us so much assistance in the defence of the Falkland Islands. Without a nuclear deterrent we would be merely a small and insignificant European nation like Germany or France, unable or unwilling to wage war in Iran or Afghanistan.

You might detect a hint of irony there but, seriously, it was your beloved old labour Prime Minister Atlee and Foreign Secretary Bevin who committed us to an "independanT2 nuclear deterrent. To quote the latter in 1946 "We have got to have this thing over here whatever it costs... we have got to have [a] bloody Union Jack on top of it."


Thats precisely the problem though, isn't it- we are a small and relatively insignificant european nation like france or germany, we need to realise that and stop playing at being a world authority. We're the man who used to rich but isn't anymore, but still buys expensive suits and jewellery in the hope he'll be accepted by his rich peers, but in reality has huge debts and might not make the rent.

Don't get me wrong I love the idea of Britain being a powerfull, sucessfull and proud country, and we can be that, but in the words of Harry Callaghan, "A mans got to know his limitations"

Edit: Totally going off topic now, but why do we need £75Billion (or £150+billion with govm. cost overuns) nuclear sub program when nukes can be relatively effectively delivered via £1m-a-pop cruise missiles? I means lets face it, if/when we go nuclear it's endgame anyway, it doesn't really matter if the devastation we inflicted was a little bit less effective than the joneses.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 16:25 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 00:01
Posts: 2258
Location: South Wales
hairyben wrote:
Edit: Totally going off topic now, but why do we need £75Billion (or £150+billion with govm. cost overuns) nuclear sub program when nukes can be relatively effectively delivered via £1m-a-pop cruise missiles? I means lets face it, if/when we go nuclear it's endgame anyway, it doesn't really matter if the devastation we inflicted was a little bit less effective than the joneses.


A nuclear sub is a sub that is powered by nuclear power, rather than, say, diesel. The advantage of this is that oxygen is not needed to drive the sub and therefore it can stay underwater for longer. [Wiki]


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 16:38 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
Lum wrote:
hairyben wrote:
Edit: Totally going off topic now, but why do we need £75Billion (or £150+billion with govm. cost overuns) nuclear sub program when nukes can be relatively effectively delivered via £1m-a-pop cruise missiles? I means lets face it, if/when we go nuclear it's endgame anyway, it doesn't really matter if the devastation we inflicted was a little bit less effective than the joneses.


A nuclear sub is a sub that is powered by nuclear power, rather than, say, diesel. The advantage of this is that oxygen is not needed to drive the sub and therefore it can stay underwater for longer. [Wiki]


Whats that got to do with the price of fish?

I'm not disputing nuke-subs are a very effective way to hide your nuke-missiles, I'm wondering what such a tactically effective but hideously expensive system gives little us over plane/ship delivered cruise or longer range missiles.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 17:01 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
Dixie wrote:
Lum wrote:
Steve wrote:
I've cycled plenty of the back roads around Munich, I remember being surprised at the quality of their back roads. Only now that you mention it do I make the comparison with our own crappy back roads. Granted much of Germany had to 'start again' after the world unpleasantness, but decades later they’re still in great shape. It's not like uK drivers don't pay for the upkeep of UK roads, so what gives?


Some parts of britain had to "start again" too. Coventry for one. Look how well that turned out.


Maybe that's why the saying "sent to Coventry" came to mind :)


Off topic .. but .... :lol:

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/sent ... entry.html


I am no wiser after reading all that... Personally .. a case of claret would each time :drink: :drink2:

The other story behind the saying which I like .. shunning and ignoring "Peeping Tom" who was supposed to be a "son of Coventry"

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 17:12 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
Steve wrote:
Draco wrote:
The roads in Germany are like billiard tables...........even the little country lanes!

....

You're right.
I've cycled plenty of the back roads around Munich, I remember being surprised at the quality of their back roads. Only now that you mention it do I make the comparison with our own crappy back roads. Granted much of Germany had to 'start again' after the world unpleasantness, but decades later they’re still in great shape. It's not like uK drivers don't pay for the upkeep of UK roads, so what gives?


Germany use Marshall Aid to put things back to normal. UK used their Marshall AId to fund the welfare state.

West German roads .. French roads .. Italian roads .. Swiss - Austrian roads .. all seem better maintained than ours overall :scratchchin:

However, German roads in the East are as bad if not worse than ours. We noted it about 5 years ago when we left Goslar to head off to Wernigerode and the Brocken chuff-chuff steam train on one holiday. We had travelled across Holland - stopping off in Hameln and then carried on Eastwards to the Harz area. We noted the roads up the border were fantastic... but hit problems as soon as we entered what was the old East Germany.

I gather some of the family have been to the Harz area more recently - within last 9 months - and state Eastern Germany still has plenty to do to match the West..

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 17:36 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
hairyben wrote:
Lum wrote:
hairyben wrote:
Edit: Totally going off topic now, but why do we need £75Billion (or £150+billion with govm. cost overuns) nuclear sub program when nukes can be relatively effectively delivered via £1m-a-pop cruise missiles? I means lets face it, if/when we go nuclear it's endgame anyway, it doesn't really matter if the devastation we inflicted was a little bit less effective than the joneses.


A nuclear sub is a sub that is powered by nuclear power, rather than, say, diesel. The advantage of this is that oxygen is not needed to drive the sub and therefore it can stay underwater for longer. [Wiki]


Whats that got to do with the price of fish?

I'm not disputing nuke-subs are a very effective way to hide your nuke-missiles, I'm wondering what such a tactically effective but hideously expensive system gives little us over plane/ship delivered cruise or longer range missiles.



They can travel faster? Have offensive and defensive weapons which can be ready at all times? Maybe. France has them. Even them Swiss train on them. ..:popcorn: off topic .. per what the Swiss say about their compulsory army training (which they have to refresh every few years or so. No one understands why .. and no one has voted it out via referenda. I gather they have had umpteen referenda on the subject.)

But I suppose the question is that each major EU country (Germany excluded) will require these subs to defend Eurozone collectively if need be. The eternal nightmare politics have a new "bogeyman" after all.. I am waiting to see how Obama deals with Bush's "Ring of Terror" - which I fear has been partially created by the political setting of the past 10 years or so :popcorn:


But we are drifiting way off topic on a runaway "submarine" and to try to steer the "submarine" back to "basking shark mode" :wink:

I think the original topic drift was perhaps questioning why so much spent on "defence" when we have matters closer to home to resolve .. like how we pay our debts.. mend the roads.. have more police officers :twisted: ..improve the NHS .. education..

And as this is a road safety site - we enthusiastic professionals all want the cash spent on roads.. road engineering.. road safety policies (practical ones which work and which include the recruitment of really talented police officers :wink:) )

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 18:39 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7357
Location: Highlands
The worst thing about this story is that NO engineers or safety officers were involved at any stage (as far as I can tell - I have contacted the Local Parish and as yet no one has called back :( ) But how can the Gov send off local councils to try and make these types of decisions to this basic degree, without any instruction or guidance being required or already in place?
Sure the fundamentals have been 'passed along' to the local councils to be guided by ?
Considering that local Councillors are not trained in any way to tackle this it is appalling to think that they do not seem to have any kind of Engineers / Safety Gide or Rules to follow ? Their aim as I understand it is to leave some roads bad to help slow things, but EVERY road needs to properly repaired. It must not be their decision to choose and especially if this is their dangerous reasoning.
Any company that has repaired the road has to be called to re-repair it if it goes bad, so how can a Council even legally make this decision?
I wonder if they sought advice from their legal advisers on this ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 18:45 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
A Parish Council has no legal responsibility for the roads in the parish. As a matter of convenience they usually report road defect to the Borough or County Council who is responsible but are not obliged to do so. In this case they have, quite correctly, chosen not to do so. One hopes that the more sensible inhabitants of the village will do the reporting themselves. And take the councillors attitude into account at the next election.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 155 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.049s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]