Weston Super Saint

Because, to the overwhelming majority of people in the country (and world), it is. That doesn't detract from the fact that it can be devastating for those aged 70 and above and also those in certain at risk groups. Both concepts can exist concurrently.

Pony!

Annoying really, that wee Jimmy Krankie can put something together that is simple to understand and implement, yet the entire British government can't decide the definition of local!

#BrexitShambles

Metropolitan police Commissioner has her say on the definition of 'local' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55630164 Although I'm not holding my breath that egg will accept this definition and certainly won't take back his 'selfish cunt' accusations

A mere drop in the ocean compared to the famine of biblical proportions, outages of medicines and collapse of trade that was previously predicted to happen in the first week of January

My 'local' news on BBC covers from Glastonbury to Bristol (about 28 miles), so 7 would be well within that definition...

Plus it's giving him more headlines.

Maidstone is worse than Blackpool - no lights and no piers Oh, and I don't think they have a Lineker's bar either

The second coup in a week

None taken For me, the clarity is in the OP where the person was 'seconded' (personally I feel that this is the wrong term and perhaps 'relocated' would be a better one to use as seconded does indeed imply a return) at the request of the end client. Whilst no process or formal disciplinary took place (this could potentially be important if a dismissal were to happen, but the fact that the person then worked for six months after the move, therefore 'accepting' the relocation, could reduce the impact), unless the 'end client' in the original job has changed, then it is unlikely that they will want the person back doing the job they've requested someone else to do. That would then only leave alternative work within the company (if any is available) or redundancy / employment termination, depending on the length of service.

He's got "bucked teeth"???

Correct. They even managed to break a door. The one that was locked fooled them though, so they just stuck with going through the open ones. Oh, and they built a gallows about half a mile away. However, the only materials they had were an old pallet, some string and some nails, so the chance of it surviving the hanging of a child's teddy looked pretty slim. Still if that passes the stringent test for a coup, then so be it!

So you agree. A complete fantasy in their own minds.

I might go 'armed to the teeth' searching for an establishment that will sell me a 'Molotov cocktail'.

Jesus Wept! What overdramatic pony! Yes, we're all aware that a bunch of morons entered the Capitol building - what they thought they were going to achieve by doing so is likely just a fantasy in their own minds. But 'armed to the teeth with guns and molotov cocktails' is over egging the pudding considerably. I've absolutely no doubt that in a country that has a fundamental right for its citizens to carry guns that there were one or two of the morons with concealed weapons, but from all the pictures and video footage available, can you find one single picture that shows people 'armed to the teeth'?

Which one was he in the picture?

That was for your benefit. I've already said I've had confirmation from the local constable. That's good enough for me 😉

A definition... So, riding to an area that is open and largely devoid of traffic (like the Somerset levels) would appear to be well WITHIN the rules. Fancy that! https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/what-counts-your-local-area-4855820

This is what blatantly breaking the regulations looks like : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55604382 I think only the most pedantic would consider cycling a couple of miles outside of town to be comparable.

And is a re-hash of the advice they have been giving since March! This one was updated on the 8th of January, yesterday : https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/coronavirus-qa-cycling-guidance which is where the graphic comes from. It also states (which is a re-hash from March since the Government haven't updated their vague guidelines!): The graphic also states at the top "this is national advice and does not reflect localised restrictions". I'm happy to follow the response from the local constable regarding this as they are responsible for interpretation of local. I appreciate that makes you very unhappy Egg, but that's one for you and Avon and Somerset police to thrash out! Besides, you've already agreed that (aside from the unlikely event of an accident requiring ICU intervention), the risk of me catching and or spreading the virus is so low as to be considered negligible!

That's their statement from the start of lockdown 1. This was subsequently updated. It now states : But it's great that you found some out of date information to support your argument.

When our 'local' area was in tier 3, the 'local' area was described as North Somerset. Travelling on the M5 from one end of the local area in North Somerset to the other is a distance of 18.3 miles. This was defined by our Local Government offices.

WTF? I don't live 'elsewhere' and am not allowed to travel there during the lockdown.

WTF? You were the one stating that less idiots on the road equated to less risk. I've merely pointed out that the regulations are not designed like that! I haven't moaned that click and collect shouldn't be allowed, merely pointed out that the regulations SPECIFICALLY state that it is allowable, which means, inevitably, a large increase in local journeys, whichn will have a knock on effect for people cycling in urban areas!