|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jul 3, 2023 8:12:36 GMT
" Her view of a low traffic neighbourhood is correct and no dissent shall be tolerated"Not a Lefty Woke then?  Must admit I had to look up what these things are. I read both sustrans (lobby for the bicycle) and rac (for the car). Have to say it doesn't sound like a terrible idea. Kind of making entire neighbourhoods into cul-de-sacs? If the DM is broadly true though, that academic needs to be sacked asap. Just by way of info. Sustrans isn't really any longer a "cycling lobby", though encouraging cycling is certainly part of its remit. These days its much more focussed on encouraging all forms of "active travel". The commonly used phrase being "walking, wheeling, cycling". Of course cycling is a big part of that and Sustrans has an historic cycling heritage. But its focus today is definitely all forms of active travel, and its mantra for things like the National Cycle Network is "paths for all" regardless of the origins of the NCNs. As to LTNs. Yes, on the face of it what is there not to like, unless one feels rabidly entitled to drive everywhere and take priority over others. However, one of the arguments often made against them is whether the research is giving the full picture: particularly do they fairly take into account the impact of displacement of traffic to immediately outside the LTN.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019 
Likes: 5,147
|
Post by adrianc on Jul 3, 2023 9:06:02 GMT
Must admit I had to look up what these things are. I read both sustrans (lobby for the bicycle) and rac (for the car). Just by way of info. Sustrans isn't really any longer a "cycling lobby", though encouraging cycling is certainly part of its remit. These days its much more focussed on encouraging all forms of "active travel". The commonly used phrase being "walking, wheeling, cycling". Of course cycling is a big part of that and Sustrans has an historic cycling heritage. But its focus today is definitely all forms of active travel, and its mantra for things like the National Cycle Network is "paths for all" regardless of the origins of the NCNs. There's a clue in the name of "Sustrans" - SUStainable TRANSport www.sustrans.org.uk/about-us/
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jul 3, 2023 9:18:42 GMT
Just by way of info. Sustrans isn't really any longer a "cycling lobby", though encouraging cycling is certainly part of its remit. These days its much more focussed on encouraging all forms of "active travel". The commonly used phrase being "walking, wheeling, cycling". Of course cycling is a big part of that and Sustrans has an historic cycling heritage. But its focus today is definitely all forms of active travel, and its mantra for things like the National Cycle Network is "paths for all" regardless of the origins of the NCNs. There's a clue in the name of "Sustrans" - SUStainable TRANSport www.sustrans.org.uk/about-us/Yes I know. I am a volunteer with them. Nonetheless, they are a) best known for their work around cycling, particularly because of their responsibilities around the National Cycle Network and b) they don't get involved in other forms of what might be considered "Sustainable Transport" such as Trains, electric cars etc. So "Active Travel" is their remit these days.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
|
Post by adrianc on Jul 3, 2023 9:26:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jul 3, 2023 9:52:33 GMT
To use your phrase: slaps head. That is not to do with specifically lobbying / campaigning for train travel. That is all part of 'joined up journeys' that enable part of your journey to be "active travel".
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,594
Likes: 2,624
|
Post by keitha on Jul 3, 2023 18:42:44 GMT
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jul 3, 2023 19:30:06 GMT
Agreed. Interesting there was no mention of what happened to the kids. I don't think they can just be dumped on the side of the road. Seems to me the pragmatic thing to do would be for an officer to drive that bus to wherever it was going then on to the pound.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jul 3, 2023 19:43:56 GMT
Agreed. Interesting there was no mention of what happened to the kids. I don't think they can just be dumped on the side of the road. Seems to me the pragmatic thing to do would be for an officer to drive that bus to wherever it was going then on to the pound. I assume a replacement bus would be sent to pick up the children. Even a policeman shouldn't drive a defective vehicle with children on board, I can see the headlines if anything went wrong.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jul 3, 2023 19:51:39 GMT
Ahhh I think you've illustrated my point quite well. It sounds like you were a banker at one stage. IMO there ought to be checks and balances to prevent individual bwankers from determining who is and who isn't a toxic buffoon and therefore who is and who isn't allowed to open an account. There are.
"PEPs is there to prevent the corrupt use of banking facilities by politicians in corrupt regimes. It is not here to silence individuals who may hold views with which we may or may not agree."But not according to you? Sadly yet another example of aggressive liberal types who will stop at nothing to attack people they don't agree with.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jul 3, 2023 20:58:57 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66090522
"PEPs is there to prevent the corrupt use of banking facilities by politicians in corrupt regimes. It is not here to silence individuals who may hold views with which we may or may not agree."But not according to you? Sadly yet another example of aggressive liberal types who will stop at nothing to attack people they don't agree with. But Michael, aren't you the person who normally heaps disdain and contempt on the BBC / BBC reporting? Anyway, yes, I read the story earlier with interest. To paraphrase what any bank CEO would say in response to this... 1. The government doesn't fund (law) enforcement in this domain to 1% of its required level. 2. The government tries to outsource this function to the banks (and their shareholders / lenders). 3. The government provides an ever-changing and entirely insufficient regulatory regime in this domain. 4. The government (or associated agencies like the FCA / BoE or equivalents in the US) come down on us like a tonne of bricks when we make a mistake (or **** something up more egregiously, which I am certainly not saying never happens). 5. Then the government takes us to task for enforcing the rules they've imposed on us. (6. Meanwhile whichever party is in power will continue to trouser as much dodgy money as they can get away with). Now I'm not pleading on behalf of the banking industry - it deserves a lot of the  that gets chucked at it - but yeah, this is all a bit rich.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jul 3, 2023 20:59:42 GMT
Actually, sadly, no bank CEO would say any of the above. They can't afford to have the balls to do so.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Jul 3, 2023 21:28:44 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66090522
"PEPs is there to prevent the corrupt use of banking facilities by politicians in corrupt regimes. It is not here to silence individuals who may hold views with which we may or may not agree."But not according to you? Sadly yet another example of aggressive liberal types who will stop at nothing to attack people they don't agree with. But Michael, aren't you the person who normally heaps disdain and contempt on the BBC / BBC reporting? Anyway, yes, I read the story earlier with interest. To paraphrase what any bank CEO would say in response to this... 1. The government doesn't fund (law) enforcement in this domain to 1% of its required level. 2. The government tries to outsource this function to the banks (and their shareholders / lenders). 3. The government provides an ever-changing and entirely insufficient regulatory regime in this domain. 4. The government (or associated agencies like the FCA / BoE or equivalents in the US) come down on us like a tonne of bricks when we make a mistake (or **** something up more egregiously, which I am certainly not saying never happens). 5. Then the government takes us to task for enforcing the rules they've imposed on us. (6. Meanwhile whichever party is in power will continue to trouser as much dodgy money as they can get away with). Now I'm not pleading on behalf of the banking industry - it deserves a lot of the that gets chucked at it - but yeah, this is all a bit rich. The banks appear to be misusing/misinterpreting the rules which are largely designed for foreign nationals or people with significant foreign earnings (Nigel Lawson's granddaughter classed as a PEP just because he was a Lord)... apparently several backbench MPs have also had the issue. Issue with Farage seems to be income paid into his company for TV work which it is claimed the bank has erroneously determined relates to Russia Today (sanctioned) when he hasnt worked for RU for several years and payments were minimal. Banks are also hiding behind money laundering legislation to prevent compromising investigations to avoid discussing reason for account closure in all cases even when AML isnt an issue. Takes me back to the Lendy loan which ran into trouble because he became a PEP AIUI government amended legislation last week to ensure UK politicians are classed as lower risk
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jul 3, 2023 21:47:48 GMT
AIUI government amended legislation last week to ensure UK politicians are classed as lower risk Interesting. Just because... they're British?
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
|
Post by adrianc on Jul 3, 2023 22:12:46 GMT
The banks appear to be misusing/misinterpreting the rules which are largely designed for foreign nationals No, there's nothing at all that I could see in the PEP legislation to define nationality or national origin of funds. It seems very clear that it's designed to cover UK PEPs as well as foreign. The Law Society (but what would they know...?) say so explicitly. www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/anti-money-laundering/pepsEx-cabinet minister, Privy Councillor, and member of the upper house? Definitely a PEP. ...but "family members" only includes children, not grandchildren.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Jul 3, 2023 22:33:22 GMT
AIUI government amended legislation last week to ensure UK politicians are classed as lower risk Interesting. Just because... they're British? Yes, domestic PEP should be assessed from a starting point that they are a lower risk - FSMA 2023 I struggle to see what prominent function identified in the list within the legislation AIUI Farage continues to occupy or has done within the last 12 months which is the period a previous PEP is still subject to the rules. So must be due to association with PEP that he qualifies
|
|
that gets chucked at it - but yeah, this is all a bit rich.