Bellefield

Paul's questions are generally in line with the thoughts of a certain segment of the population, and therefore they are relevant whether the ministers like them or not.  Overall I'm happy with the presentations and the questions and answer sessions.

reason for delay on their website is 

Quote

This sailing has been delayed due to a technical issue. Passengers are asked to check in no later than 2000hrs.

50 minutes ago, swoopy2110 said:

Seacat currently taking over 5 hours to get to Liverpool. Doing only 13knts

Stopped for ages before. Return sailing currently delayed.

I heard, off one of the passengers, that the seacat hit a pier again, not sure how true it is though

12 hours ago, dilligaf said:

TBF, when these managers take on the pubs, they may not realise that their working week will be 70+ hours per week.

I would not do that job for twice their pay.

is that true though?  I mean the managers not realising how many hours a week they will need to work?

Surely anyone going into the pub trade knows the opening hours they are expected to be involved with, and also the work that needs to be done when the pub is closed?

Its not a job, its a way of life.

17 minutes ago, Barrie Stevens said:

Could this also have something to do with the price? I live five minutes from a small expensively refurbished posh pub (Admiral J McHardy) in an urban area by two bus stops and its £3.80 a pint and the rest is silly money. So few people use it the atmosphere is more like a private club. I refuse to pay £3.80 and down the road there is a rough pub and that is £4.25...Consequence is I have stopped drinking totally unless it is a formal event with best bib and tucker and then it is wine, port and cognac. Just not worth it anymore.... 

I suspect the Admiral J McHardy will go bust soon, not because of the prices, but because of the pretentious name.  This doesn't sound like a proper old pub name, so I'm guessing it was changed as part of the refurb?  Or at least recently?

these pesky drink driving laws mean its just a little too out of the way.  

Nice pub like, used to drop in for a swift half on the way back from a hill climb or two on the mountain bike

21 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

As your link shows Woolley, the whole rehabilitation and redemption strategy is fundamentally flawed. Many offenders can soak up this sort of approach without any real behavioural change or result. It's turning everything the wrong way round. Real rehabilitation can only come from the offender's own motivation and a real decision to turn their life around. That's the point at which they can and should be helped to achieve this. It's not rocket salad but you're fighting a whole profession and industry of experts who just don't recognise common sense - there's no career or money in it. 

On the whole I think rehabilitation is preferably to permanent incarceration, both morally and financially.  However, you may be right in that the system may be flawed in that it assumes everyone can be, or even wants to be, rehabilitated.  The trouble is, we do not have a process whereby someone can be ignored and labelled "not for rehabilitation".  It is there for everyone, and people would probably lose those jobs or careers if they took the decision themselves that one of their charges should not be considered for rehabilitation.  I don't know how you address that without changing the system, and individuals can't do that, it has to be a statutory change.

looks like he managed to reduce his sentence and was out after five years, however now he "walks on egg shells" so it looks like the rule is working

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/10/local/la-me-pizzathief10-2010feb10

On 14/06/2017 at 4:09 PM, woolley said:

@ Censorship: I'm OK with that until you reach the last sentence. Yes, anyone can make a mistake, and so long as the crime is not too heinous they should be given the opportunity and help to turn it around. However, it should not be beyond the wit of the system to have a mechanism to recognise those who are unredeemably incorrigible and make sure they are unable to wreak further suffering on their fellow citizens.

the US have something like this, the three strike rule, which basically gives someone a life sentence (25 years) if they offend three times.  The rules vary by each state but its mean to put re-offenders out of society.  Its supposed to be for felony re-offenders, but I remember a case where a guy had  been convicted for stealing a pizza, and that counted towards his three strikes, so he got 25 years for that offence.

here it is

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/03/05/us/25-years-for-a-slice-of-pizza.html

not saying that it was right or wrong that he was imprisoned for 25 years, or whether society should try to rehabilitate rather than detain offenders.  it just reminded me of this case.

Did the Ben have to replace the lifeboat before it could sail again?

13 hours ago, MrFunk said:

From a strictly personal point of view my only real concern is seeing a massive gate making it more difficult for other people who currently launch from there being able to continue to do so.  

What massive gate?  Where will it be?

Are they moaning because only a few months ago the site was purchased in a blaze of glory saying they were going to restore it to its former glory as a tourist attraction, and now at least some it it will be for private residential dwellings and holiday lettings?  Which everyone suspected was the case in the first place.

Some people are not happy about something

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=33922&headline=Tuesday is news day: Port Soderick plans get a hostile reception from some&sectionIs=News&searchyear=2017

I tried to stay away from this thread as it was all getting a bit emotional, but now the kids are travelling back can someone tell me if it was diagnosed as the Novovirus?  Or was it food poisoning, or don't we know?

If it was the Novovirus have all the kids now been cleared of it now?  Was it really over in one day and they are safe to travel back now (as safe as they can be in this weather)?

Seems to have been a lot of hysteria about it from all sides, but I haven't seen anyone say what the actual illness was and that its now safe to travel (maybe I missed it)?

 

 

Change the coffee, that last lot was tripe in coffee cup.

 

Good evening x-in-man, rest assured we will be changing the coffee. We will be introducing freshly ground espresso drinks (from a bona fide Barista machine I hasten to add) as well as a good quality filter coffee.

 

Kind regards

 

Sam

 

Are we to expect City of London type pricing on the food and drinks?

 

only for the visitors, there will be a lower tariff for the comeovers, and an even lower tariff for the stayovers and those who can prove they are purebloods.

man the ramparts guys.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/tax-havens-reformed-outlawed-panama-papers

so that's it all sorted then, the UK government is responsible for the formation of all tax havens, and it just needs to stop banks and anything else operating in "tax havens", what a marvellously Socialist way of dealing with the problem.... or am I thinking of Stalinist?

Worst piece of journalism I've seen in a long time, even for the guardian.

 

The whole thing is pretty small beer really though isn't it? For the Worldwide Murphy Mob I mean. For all of that info and millions of documents, and the attention it's getting, you would think all of the G7 leaders, multi-national company owners and rich celebs would be involved. But no. A few Middle East sheiks, a bloke from Iceland, some of Putin's henchmen from what I hear. A real rag-tag of also rans. So are they making a mountain out of a molehill?

 

No doubt the conspiracy theorists will tell us that the big boys have covered their tracks too well to get caught.

 

A few ME rulers who have nothing to hide based on the fact that there is no tax in those countries (because they set the rules and own the country and resources) and it's common knowledge the ME in general has trillions of pounds worth of assets all round the world. Jes' how much of London (and the USA) do they own?

 

From what I saw in that article the Isle of Man doesn't get mentioned. And whilst I've no doubt Panama will have a lot to answer for it appears all the doom mongers are simply jumping on the band wagon and assuming the IOM must be one of the main culprits.

 

I don't think anyone believes this, at least not anyone who is aware of the island's regulatory system, but the issue is that whenever "tax havens" get mentioned the same old list is rolled out, and it will include the Isle of Man, regardless of whether or not we are complicit in any way to what has been happening in other jurisdictions.

All offshore financial centres get tarred with the same brush, especially by the papers, and there is no upside for Cameron et al to say that the Isle of Man is clean. Why would they say that, when for all he knows the next scandal could be from here (or the UK, or anywhere).

So he will play to the crowd, promising tighter reforms in crown dependencies and putting pressure on them to provide even more information on their clients. It will accelerate processes that are already under discussion and if they are delivered then Cameron can take credit for them.

And as to whether its small beer, it wont be to the vast majority of the public in Iceland, Russia, India, ME, Australia, etc. as they will see it as the tip of the iceberg, this is just one company that has been breached, and there are many others in Panama and elsewhere, who are all doing the same (in their eyes).

It sounds like some of this data has been leaked in batches for over a year to various jurisdictions and investigations are all well underway, but putting them out there in the public eye, we will no doubt see a lot more investigations and press coverage of those involved.