Currently Network Rail owns and operates (nearly) all the railways, signals and ticket offices. Not sure about stations. Train companies rent rail stock, but they pay a high price for this and subsequently pass that onto the consumer, while maintaining that it's necessary to charge expensive fares because their costs are so high.
The government owns Network Rail. The government will take over the rail companies, and this will probably end up staggered as different companies have different contract dates. The rail stock itself will probably remain under the same ownership with more or less the same ridiculous rental charges.
So all in all this probably won't make that much difference.
Exactly. The rolling stock is where all the money goes, meanwhile the public-facing train companies you buy tickets from (who rent rolling stock) operate at or near a loss. This way the train companies can negotiate better contracts with local governments - "Look, we're barely making any money, we have to charge ludicrously high fares for piss poor service!"
I'm gonna go against the grain and no doubt be downvoted, but surely this is overblown compared to the level of actual harm it causes? They're not real images, almost everyone is aware they're not real images, they don't have a negative impact on the lives of the victim beyond them being creeped out that people are perving over them (but again, everyone knows it's not really them).
I can see it has the potential for leading to actual harm, eg a stalker developing worse behaviour, but I don't really see that it meets the threshold in and of itself. It's only slightly worse than doing something someone else doesn't like or saying something offensive.
They stab each other in the back, sure, but one thing they do manage to do is band together and vote to deny children school meals at Christmas during a once in a lifetime pandemic. Thats... something.
Very few do, I think. It's been in the deal since the beginning, although until the recent re-write it was Article 16. Same wording as before, different article number.
The House of Lords have asked the government repeatedly just how many migrants the UK will accept in return, and the government have dodged and not answered. For all we know, it could be 1 for 1.
Chickens aren't any more prone to salmonella than any other poultry, eg ducks. The reason chicken get salmonella and the reason you're expected to cook it thoroughly to kill off the bacteria is purely down to how chickens are reared and the appalling conditions.
Starmer’s party also faced a challenge from another former Labour MP in the form of Simon Danczuk, who was suspended from the party in 2015 after sending inappropriate messages to a teenager. Danczuk, Rochdale’s MP from 2010 to 2017, was standing for Reform UK, the anti-immigration party founded by Nigel Farage.
Reform had fewer votes than the Lib Dem's, that's barely a challenge.
Will this seat be up for re-election during the upcoming General Election, or does it get a pass for being so recent?
And that price almost certainly doesn't include the cost of hosting the vulnerable refugee that Rwanda sends to the UK in return.
Article 19: Resettlement of vulnerable refugees
The Parties shall make arrangements for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom, recognising both Parties’ commitment towards providing better international protection for refugees.
Drax helps the UK government meet its climate targets because, on paper at least, the power station is treated as emission-free. This is because international carbon accounting rules state that greenhouse gas emissions from burning wood are counted in the country where the trees are felled as opposed to where they are burned.
Such bullshit. All the emissions happen here, but they don't get counted here.
·5 months ago
This makes me want to sing the Tetris theme.