Forum Topics

Bonfires - again

Local builder (there are many, as you know) was burning furiously in the back garden yesterday.I have come back from shopping today to find my porch (before I even get inside) full of the stench of smoke.  I have been over to talk to him and he says he has been told by his 'contact inside the Council' that it is okay to burn whatever he wants as long as he keeps the bonfire contained - so that is what he is doing - burning a huge pile of what would reasonably gone off in a skip on a continuous, but contained bonfire.The bonfire, if we are splitting hairs, is inside a container.What information is going out and from/by whom?He has put the fire out whilst he rings his contact back to check if he can carry on and he expects to be given the same information - that it is okay to continue.I cannot open any windows or doors or put out my washing and the smoke is still coming into the house through cracks.How much does a bonfire wreck the environment?  I mean, I can smell it but it is still in the atmosphere for quite a distance and being breathed in even if people aren't aware of it directly.   :-(Somebody needs to sort out quality of advice and information being given out.  If this advice is wrong, then will somebody call the person/department to account?How much financial loss is a direct result of incorrect information?  We see all this publicity about loss to public finds because of incorrect benefits being claimed.Maybe I am wrong and maybe the environment can sustain 8.00am to 6.00pm bonfires and as a Borough resident it is just something we have to put up with.I have rung customer service because if I ring and log a complaint they will send me a letter next week and by then most of it will have been burnt.Can anybody see the sense in having a duel response system which takes on board some things have to be dealt with straight away?  I would hope (have said it so many times) that it would be self funding as if the response finds a bonfire or pile of rubbish (etc etc etc etc and etc) closing down a footpath, you fine for costs straight away.

Sarah Felstead ● 6800d13 Comments ● 6784d

Prescription charges

Is it just me being a moany git or are we really having the p**s taken out of us?BBC Website.Prescription charges drop to £5  Prescription charges will be abolished by 2011 The cost of NHS prescriptions in Scotland has been cut by almost £2. The reduction, from £6.85 to £5, is the first of several price drops, which will result in free prescriptions for all in 2011. Last December, the Scottish Government announced it would set aside £97m to abolish prescription charges. Once the charges have gone, the policy is expected to cost £57m a year. More than 90% of prescriptions are already dispensed for free. In December, Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon told MSPs the prescription charges were a "tax on ill health". Labour expressed reservations about the move. There will be further £1 cuts for the next two years before the final abolition of the charge in Scotland. Prescriptions became free in Wales last year. 'Competing priorities' The SNP manifesto at last year's Scottish Parliament elections promised to "immediately abolish" prescription charges for people with chronic conditions, cancer and for those in full-time education or training. The cost of pre-payment certificates will also be cut over the same timescale as prescription charges, coming down at first from £98.70 to £48, then down to £38 and finally £28, before they are ended. Under current exemption rules, about half the population qualifies for free prescriptions and about 92% of items dispensed in Scotland are given to patients free of charge. Ms Sturgeon said: "That this is all taking place less than a year after the new Scottish Government came to power underlines the fast pace of delivery and the fact that this is a government of action." Conservative health spokeswoman Mary Scanlon said the reduction in the cost of the pre-payment certificate would improve healthcare and lead to better patient compliance. However, she added: "We do have an issue with supporting free prescriptions for people who can afford to pay. "As we all know there are many competing priorities for the allocation of resources in the NHS and we would question the giving of free prescriptions to all." E-mail this to a friend   Printable version  Bookmark with:

Kevin Farnan ● 6794d4 Comments ● 6789d

Conservative Party nationally opposes Heathrow Expansion

The Conservtaive Party locally in Hounslow and other west London boroughs have long opposed the expansion of Heathrow. Councillor Barbara Reid and Parliamentary Candidate Mary Macleod have been particularly active in this respect locally.However, the Conservative Party yesterday announced that it opposed to the further expansion of Heathrow Airport as a party of national party policy. Shadow Transport Secretary, Theresa Villiers MP, said the case for a third runway had not been made. According to the Evening Standard:"She said the Government should look at alternatives such as greater use of high-speed rail links before sanctioning further growth at the airport. Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly is due to announce soon whether she will give the green light to a third runway, sixth terminal and a massive increase in the number of flights at Heathrow. "The shift in policy is likely to be welcomed by green campaigners." said the Evening Standard. Theresa Villiers MP said: "The Government is set on building a third runway regardless of whether key economic and environmental questions are answered. However, they have failed to make the case." Like many others, Theresa Villiers MP also questioned the thoroughness of the Labour Government's consultation document outlining the proposed expansion. "On page 55 of one of the annexes to the consultation document, we find them casually admitting that they have failed to price in the carbon effects of surface access to the airport... "And they have included, as an economic benefit, the forecast increase in Air Passenger Duty - despite the fact that much of this will be a transfer from UK citizens to the exchequer, and hence not a benefit for the economy as a whole." "She said the Government should look at a northsouth-high speed rail line linked to Heathrow and the Channel Tunnel as an alternative to expansion. "We could dispense with the need for hundreds of the flights now clogging up the airport," she said. She added: "The Government... has given us a consultation document which fails to make the economic case, fails to make the environmental case, and fails to consider the alternatives." It is now clear that it essential to vote for Boris Johnson as Mayor of London, Tony Arbour as our London Assembly Member and Mary Mcleod as our MP in order to ensure that we elect people and a party who are solidly exposed to Heathrow Expansion. Others such as Labour Mayor Ken Livingstone and Labour MP Ann Keen  may say that  they are opposed to Heathrow Expansion but they are supporters, and in Ann Keen's case a junior member,of the very same Labour Government that is enthusiastically supporting this expansion.Labour Party members like Ann Keen and Ken Livingstone simply cannot be trusted to put loyalty to their constiuents above loyalty to their party as has been shown in the case of Ann Keen MP's recent vote for post office closures.

David Giles ● 6792d0 Comments ● 6792d