badgerx16

Mayfair

What if your income, or a significant part thereof, is a pension ?

Being married to a teacher, and knowing many more both socially and professionally, none of those I am aquainted with would agree with that article. I suspect she is very much in the minority.

Augustus

teeth

Is it truly a 'tragedy' as James May claims ? On the day after an airliner flew into a mountain, surely he could have been more circumspect ?

remove

Tiger ( feet )

I'm pleased that I've brightened your otherwise grey day.

I don't think we'll make the top 4, but I do think that 5th is up for grabs between us, the bin dippers, and the spuds - ( I'd love to finish above Adam the Llama, Dejan Lost-his-Head-in-Liverpool, and the Argie ). It is almost certain we cannot be worse than 7th, which after all is still an improvement on last season.

....

Geordie

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I disagree. It may not have been the Doomsday that the popular media promoted, but we put in a lot of work upgrading and amending systems, and still had a couple that we missed. ( My overtime was very welcome, and it even got me out of jury service ).

Just got enough of a break in the cloud to spot it. ( And as for the reference to the Y2K 'bug' - it ultimately appeared to be a damp squib because of the amount of work put in in advance to migtigate the problem. )

Surely they aren't 'offenders' until they have been found guilty ?

Corrected !

Lotus

When you know you are superior, you don't need to emphasise the fact.

I've found just the thing :

According to that, which I had previously read, HMQ only vetoed one bill, a private members bill trying to remove the need for her authority to declare war. All the other bills mentioned required royal consent, which was given under advice from ministers; "The sovereign has not refused to consent to any bill affecting crown interests unless advised to do so by ministers". Mind you, David Cameron has held some interesting opinions on this : http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/feb/06/uk.conservatives

The Royal veto is only, ( and very rarely ), exercised on the advice of ministers, so whose vested interests do you think such act would be serving ?

You do realise that the Monarch is a figurehead, who effectively sits on the throne because Parliament wishes it. The Queen has 'powers' but cannot exercise any of them independently. As a republican, I'm a British citizen but "subject" to nobody. My only interaction with the Monarch is to handover their head in return for goods purchased or to lick the back of it to indicate postage has been paid.

Portswood Infants Bitterne Park Infants Bitterne Park Juniors KES Coleg Y Prifysgol Abertawe

eider

Wrong ( question )