udderlyoffroad

A somewhat clickbait-y title, and sadly the interview barely gets time to expand on this, somewhat unclear, concept... If you think the 'evel toreees' don't have a clue, nu labour just said 'hold my beer'

A lot of people want some sort of permission, and like following rules. The COVID pandemic proved this, people seriously asking for government approval to do this, do that... That would of course involve a 'private prosecution', which is not easy to get to court in the first place. If you tried to involve the police/CPS, after the 'guns in a field' panic/firearms-all-over-bar-the-shouting incident, I doubt any sensible officer would want to get himself into the quagmire of trying to prove someone was not following the GL. Especially in the case of pigeons, where as has been pointed out, It's very easy to demonstrate the effect of agricultural damage by checking their crop. Nope, it would be up to the CPS to prove you did not follow the conditions of the GL, and thus were in violation of the Wildlife and countryside act. Eh? No it wouldn't. It involves the use of good judgement (or common sense if you must employ that over-worked term). Check lists are there to prompt you, not be blindly followed. Obedience of fules, and guidance of wyse men and all that. Incidentally, nothing stopping you from turning the stipulations of the GL into a check list for you to follow - or more likely, a flow chart. This is actually how police legal guides are written, in flow chart form, to the hope being to enable complex legislation to be followed on the ground in a hurry.

This is sound advice IMHO.

First sensible post on this thread. We got rid of conscription in the 50s because it became clear we needed a professional armed forces to operate and maintain complex equipment. It took the best part of the 18mths/2yrs they had just to train them up on the new cold-war era kit. Soon as they were vaguely trained, most departed for civvy life soon as they could, for better pay and conditions. It's absolute fantasy to think we could do the same again, and those who wish national service to be a giant youth training scheme are invariably 'boomers' who were never we part of it! Incidentally, an actual call up would involve all males 18-60, sorted by the last digit of your NI number, A most likely, D least likely....

Let us know what he finds Poetry is the last refuge of saints and scoundrels, and the only place where telling which is which becomes almost impossible.

I don't follow. Just match the com and L1's L2's? If you mean that on MK switches, the wire at first glance should go in the hole where you stick your terminal screwdriver, I agree. However, it does route the wire to a slightly better place in my experience. If you're struggling, why not just buy an identical MK 2 way switch? That way the wiring is identical. Here's the thing though, looking at the wire colours, and the twisted earths, and your original switch, I'd bet that switch has been changed before. Might not be the switch.

Craic is, that’s how earthing used be done, twist wires together, bit of sleeving over top if you’re lucky, jobs a goodun. Still done that way in some countries, they actually sell wire twisting tools, similar to aviation lock wire twisters. Annnyway, doubt you’d get very far trying to sue for bad advice, especially as the op has clearly so far managed to turn the power off. So, having isolated the circuit, locked out/tagged out & proved dead (cough). The issue is you need to match the wires going to the right terminal designations, not their positions on the back of the switch, as they can change. So the wire in the ‘com’ terminal has to go in the ‘com’ terminal again, L1 to L1 etc. Don’t just swap the wires over. Fortunately you have pictures of the ‘before’ situation on your phone to reference.

Apologies Scully, I just mashed the 'quote' button. Must be the updated forum software... 😁 Quite; even if I wanted to ski, as a self employed contractor, cost/benefit/risk doesn't stack up for me. And I'm not alone in this amongst my colleagues. 🤣 There are variations of that quote that does actually cover that scenario, but I figured the one I quoted was less likely to get a moderator's paw twitching over the 'lock thread' button...

Shame. You should try everything in life at least once, except for morris dancing and heroin. Personally am not an adrenalin junkie and actively seek to avoid skiing areas. Have tried it though.

The law is an ***; if you wish to discourage, or even ban, something, you need to be able to clearly define it. Fines (generally) go straight to the 'consolidated fund' - i.e. the treasury. With good reason, because otherwise it creates perverse incentives to fine people. For....what? The whole point of a ski slope is that it's a safe area, kept clear of excess snow that could cause avalanche, and away from trees for you to ski into. Your ski pass pays for the ski patrol in case you do injure yourself, and your medical insurance pays for your hospital bill. You do have medical cover including winter sports, don't you? Now off-piste skiing is a whole different ball game. There you need experienced guides and good life insurance. Make sure it includes the cost of repatriating your frozen carcass. There are only so many risks mountain rescue will take. So much this. Trying to legislate for stupid people will only result in the universe inventing a better idiot.

Probably because that option has been removed? My local force (Avon and Somerset) removed the pdf application form that you could print from their website. Apparently they will still reluctantly furnish you with the pdf to print out & complete, but I can understand their reticence. Paying someone to manually input these things on 2024 is hardly a sensible use of resources.

About 29 in my case. Between travelling for work and visiting distributed family members in Europe, RSA and North America, 'holidays' as such just aren't on my agenda. Definitely not relaxing in the least to spend a fortnight on the Costa Packet with a bunch of other charming people who think shouting is akin to speaking another language.

My dad got to a relatively senior level within ICL but was fired in the late 80s by his boss. He reckons it was still his best career move! Something about a terrible culture aiming to mimic the worst of corporate America. Obviously that’s 35+ years ago so in all likelihood has zero relevance to this wheelie bin fire

Indeed, run the -10 C rated stuff in winter, not come across conditions in the UK yet that’ll freeze it yet, provided the windscreen is slightly warm- so try to avoid using the jets within the first 10mins or so.

Nope. What I actually said was This remember, was following on from @oowee's suggestion that staff *should* work to rule. No crazy conspiracy, I'm not the only one to say it, and I said a 'good number', not 'many', 'lots' or 'all'. Whilst we're on this subject; I said something both suggestively and quite blatantly? Those are two mutually exclusive statements, it can't be both - which is it? Or, let's be honest, are you unhappy because I dared blaspheme the new national religion, the NHS and its heroes? So...you agree with me that there'll be an improvement, Let's agree to differ, and say we *do* agree on the that there'll be an effect, but not on its cause. I'd suggest that the media landscape isn't what it was, and we now have right-of-centre broadcasters (Talk TV, GBN) as well as left-of-centre (C4, BBC, Sky) so a '97 style 'things can only get better' media honeymoon isn't going to happen. The NHS. The front line workers seemed quite happy with it. Where were the protests, the defiantly carrying on, the sticking to fingers up to management? Nope, what we got instead was TikToks on empty wards by bored nurses. The culture is rotten to the core, with zero accountability. They shut the wards, and the medical personnel went along with it, with few honourable exceptions. Once again, nobody else in the world did this, because they knew they would only create themselves problems down the line, and costs themselves more money. But in the infinite money pit that is the NHS, no problem, we can just stop treating people, because there'll be no comeback. Must be the evel torees to blame for the massive waiting lists. I quite agree that those at the top want to be held accountable, Hancock in particular. But let's not exempt NHS middle and senior management from this, and that definitely includes clinical staff! Anyone who doesn't think that the official net migration figure - a city the size of Leeds or Glasgow every year - isn't going to put a strain on housing or healthcare (of whichever system) is living in utter denial.

Ok now you're just going on a whataboutery rant. The 'what about when it's life threatening injuries' argument is so bunk it's unreal. What about when it's not? Once again you've totally missed my point. There will be a noticeable improvement despite nothing changing. That is my prediction, and I'm not alone in this. My complaint about the TikToking nurses was that this *wasnt* people taking five minutes from their busy shifts. They shut the wards. There are plenty of NHS workers who reported having nothing to do during COVID. Are you getting it yet? They shut. Cancer. Wards. It's an absolute disgrace, and no other civilised country did this Good night.

And you'd suggest...what? Please don't say PR. Plenty of other nations have PR, still face the same challenges, and are locked in a eternal coalitions at various governmental levels. There isn't much sense of taking long term difficult decisions that would otherwise be impossible thanks to FPTP. If we're honest, you can't get a fag paper between Keif Starmer's Labour and Sunak's torees. Other than a few of their respective fringe MP's they both promise more of the same. Possibly more nanny-state-ery under Keif, but the torees aren't exactly lacking in that department either. Genuinely hope they make the right decision for them. Was talking to a younger pal of mine (thirties) who moved to BC a couple of years ago last night. Really worked out well for him, his (not medical) skills are in demand there. He's not sure the money is much better in terms of pay - minus taxes/cost of living, but certainly the headline amounts are much better. 🤣 Pull the other one Lloyd, if people went on TV criticising their employer in the private sector the way they do in the NHS, they'd be out the door. I never said majority, but I could point a few fingers if it would make you feel better. You're not seriously telling me that woman was pulling her considerable weight in terms of patient care under evel toree rule. Exactly my assertion, those people will magically start doing their jobs, even though nothing's changed, there will be a measurable improvement in outcomes. I'm assuming you're too young to remember '97? Or even...you know COVID...dancing nurses on TikTok whilst cancer wards stopped treating people?

Those 2 sentences appear to contradict each other, or at the very least you not taking your own advice. Sooo, because we do things badly in this country, 'Europe' does it better, we shouldn't look to copy the best bits of the European system because we do it badly? Makes no sense. I'm regularly on continental Europe for work. I do see reality. I see what works about the European project and what does not. What does NOT work is that NHS waiting lists are now so bad, it's noticeable in terms of economic productivity. People are off sick for eminently treatable conditions (knee replacements, cataracts, you name it) because treatment is so rationed. Whereas, in most western European democracies they have no concept of a 'waiting list'. Tell me with a straight face that the NHS is the answer to the problem of how to provide healthcare. I see plenty of flat earthers, they're the ones saying we can afford to treat the whole world, for free at the point of need from a vanishingly small pool of net contributors. To be fair, you've more or less said the same: It needs replacing with an insurance based system, and free at the point of need has to stop. The latter is a problem faced by all developed countries. But let's not bring up the state sanctioned executions, sorry 'voluntary' euthanasia, debate again.

Why? They represent a minority of militant, politically motivated doctors. Sack the lot of 'em. See if patients notice the difference. Doubt it somehow. I ask again, what is 'the correct' amount to spend on healthcare?

Because it's an outrageous, politically motivated demand. Open your eyes Lloyd90, the media and social media is chock full of activist staff. In any other walk of life, people regularly absolutely slating their employer publicly like that wouldn't remain employed for very long. What's your point? I'd bet you 90% of NHS staff have no idea how much money the NHS gets per day, nor how much 'the correct' amount is. Whilst they have funds for 'art projects' and slavery reparations, healthcare can go hang. It is inexcusable. Maybe take a step back, see how countries just across the channel manage to provide actual healthcare, for the same or less cost than we do, then we can talk about so-called medical professionals and their avaricious demands.

I agree reform don't appear to stand for anything and couldn't even hope to form a government. Nevertheless, the choice for me is a spoiled ballot (AKA none of the above) or a third party candidate. It has to be the latter option. The more votes these fringe parties get, the more they grow and have some chance of challenging the incumbent Lib-Lab-Con trifecta of awfulness.

This discussion is all very well, but north of the border, the BMA equivalent have settled for less than half of the *unbelievable* 35% already asked for. This is pure politicking on behalf of the BMA, and people are dying as a result. The fact that more people are not up in arms about this is...well frankly insane. Doctors refusing to treat cancer patients because they want 35% more money. I'd get ban if I used the words I want to. I suspect a good number of "our NHS heros" already do, and will magically start doing their job as soon as the evel torees are deposed and Sir Keir is crowned El Presidente, even though nothing else will have changed.

IF there was enough demand for a basic offroad vehicle, it would be made. But there isn't, and manufacturers can't afford to appeal to the second hand buyers.

Apparently the NHS has the money for 800 people engaged in diversity roles, of some kind or another. It is and remains completely unaccountable for its failings. And yes, whilst it receives £184m per day, its medical personnel should be banned from striking. Lack of money is really not the problem with the NHS.

Might be worth asking for a weekend test drive, put some mile on one and see how you feel? The ergonomics on the RHD sounds like a proper howler to me, but then I never found I had issues with elbow room in my Defender, despite the fact everyone else complained about it. I've only sat in a Grenadier at the game fair, but my 5' 9" /1.75m frame didn't seem to struggle. I'd assume that like the aircraft overhead panel concept it's based on, these are only switches you use rarely and not whilst driving at speed - like auxiliary lights. But this is still its undoing. Even with price increases, a modern pickup will do 80% of what this does, for...60% of the money?