bridge too far

No, but equally no-one could say he was guilty (of what, I don't know - just being there?) The marvellous thing about this country is that innocence is assumed until guilt is proven - or it should be. However, these days, the Met seems to be judge, jury and executioner. That's scary.

Thank goodness they weren't armed. I mean, transpose that situation to a tube train. Just imagine what would happen in THAT scenario if the police were armed. Oh....

..........................................................

So - let me get this straight - there are two football clubs in the South [whose (erstwhile) directors are connected] who are in financial straits? Well, suck my plums and jar my jellies!

Or we could copy the fine example set by Aston Villa. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/jun/03/astonvilla.premierleague

Some very disturbing witness accounts here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/08/g20-ian-tomlinson-death-witnesses

If that's the case, why is he still posting on here

Here's me thinking McDonalds was taking over KFC, Dominos Pizza etc. etc.

And your verbal diarrhoea is doing that, is it - uniting the fan base? Strewth

Space is often at a premium in hospitals (it really is) so to provide an office with all the associated costs of cleaning etc. is not small beer. IIRC the different faiths do share one office, however. But other equally worthwhile support (such as the WRVS and various charities) do have to pay rent to the hospitals, so I don't see why the churches can't. I wonder if some churches are closing because they don't get enough people attending services?

I don't have any problem with this. And I don't think they're suggesting that priests SHOULDN'T be allowed to do this. The question is about who should pay. Let's face it, a lot of churches are pretty rich. I wonder, though, how the NHS decides what is and isn't a religion. For example, would a representative of the Church of Scientology be considered?

Barfy - I enjoyed your very articulate POV but I've got to take issue with this bit: would you want your doctor or dentist stoned? what about the emergency services? also do you then have to take into account that more people might be tempted to drive whilst under the influence and have to increase policing in this area? What about if your boss is on a bad trip when doing your annual appraisal That could equally apply to alcohol, don't you think? I think some employers do have random alcohol testing already. For sure in the NHS you're not supposed to have alcohol in your blood stream (this can cause some people problems if they're on call when there's a Major Emergency). And I know of some anaesthetists who sniff stuff in Theatre. So I don't really see how legalised drug consumption is any different to alcohol consumption in this respect.

I took my grandson last year when he was 5. I soon realised he was too young - children of that age don't have the attention span. And as for taking babes-in-arms to a match on a freezing cold night...... Crazy.

I'm an aetheist. Does the NHS pay for Mr / Ms Nobody to offer me a pat on the head if I'm proper poorly? No.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7988476.stm or should the various churches stump up for the salaries etc etc of their ministries? It costs the NHS £40m a year to provide chaplaincy. Any views on this?

I see Wotte is still learning how to do the teapot impression (2nd Wotte photo)

No, it's a :oops: I replied to the wrong post smiley

......

Dahlias are better IMO

It's Legs at the moment.

I think there are local elections on June 4th but not ALL councils participate. Some councils elect a full council once every 3 years and others elect one third (rotating) every year. I don't know if Southampton will fall in the latter category.

This Jim Ratcliffe? Lives in Southampton? http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-charts/profile-jim-ratcliffe-britains-most-private-billionaire.aspx

I agree. I'm sure there'll be some sort of Mexican standoff. (BTF in agreement with NickH shocker :shock:)

Only inflates the price and fosters crime IMO

Probably falls under the 'commercial in confidence' catch-all, Trousers. I would reckon that the Administrator will carry out some sort of high level due diligence first to weed out the serious from the delusional and then maybe short-list, say, 3 serious contenders for in-depth analysis.