peterms

Which policies are you thinking of? Green policy on Drugs I believe to be quite sensible, similar to the dutch model, but more support through NHS for hard drug addicts (e.g. Heroine addicts) Their Energy policy is good in principle but would either not be different to what is being done already, OR will need a HUGE sum of money to get it done in a relatively quick time (30 years or so). They want pretty much 100% renewable energy, which can't be done, not until technology in renewables significantly makes them more efficient. Drugs policy is an interesting area. If you approach it from an economic standpoint, I think it might be more cost-effective to have a policy based on treatment and intervention aimed at managing the problem, coupled with looking for alternatives for those using the stuff - which in turn gets into trying to understand why they are using. Is it a personal issue around addictive personality? A social thing about peer groups and lifestyle? Is it related to limited economic prospects? In most cases, money spent on trying to understand and treat the issue would be more effective, and would produce a better quality of life for the rest of us, than an approach based on trying to catch them after their four hundredth burglary and bang them up for a few months, releasing them to go back to the same old thing. But we seem to have a policy based a little more on the idea of punishment, and treatment as something which should play a minor role rather than the main plank of policy. I reckon this more liberal policy wouldn't cost more, probably less, and would be more effective in curbing both drug use and the unpleasant impacts on the rest of us. Energy - tough one. We've known since at least the 70's that our current energy policy can only lead to recurrent energy crises, economic destabilisation, and environmental catastrophe. We also know that there are alternative technologies which can help deal with a large part of the problem. We know that they require big investment to make them work, that the private sector won't lead the way, but that if there are enough tax penalties for bad energy use and rewards for good energy use, then people very quickly change their behaviour, firms (for example) start making windows and boilers with greater thermal efficiency, the costs fall because production is on a larger scale, and it all becomes a bit more affordable. If you see a change in energy policy as something which must be wholly state-funded, then it's unaffordable without massive tax increases. If the government chooses to create costs and benefits to encourage and discourage certain behaviours, then it starts to look more affordable, as in Germany for example (they haven't got their energy policy sorted and foolproof, but they seem a bit further down the road than us). But really, the question is not whether we need to invest much, much more in renewables. It's how, and how quickly, we can do so. Timid nods in the direction of a few wind farms while appeasing the oil companies really won't work. In the same way, recognising that radical changes in energy policy are needed, while voting for people who won't make this change, won't work either.

Which policies are you thinking of?

That won't wash, Jon. MOD has been overspending for years. They knew years before 2004 that they would have to make cuts in their wishlist in order to keep in line with what they knew was available to them. Instead of doing so, like every other department had to, they both continued spending on big expensive projects which were allowed to overspend to a criminal extent, then they tried a trainee accountant's ruse to break the known spending rules, but it wasn't allowed. So they disbanded four divisions, because that was something they preferred to do rather than control their budgets or rein in their pet projects. And also, I have no doubt, because that was more visible and more politically unacceptable, as a means of trying to make people feel they were being downtrodden by a heartless Treasury. Now, we hear all the stuff about "Ooh, I was so cross! I nearly gave him a piece of my mind, I nearly did!". What a bunch of bullshitters.

Here's a slightly different take on it: Seems like the Torygraph missed that bit. Still, I expect it's hard to maintain concentration all through such a long hearing. Or perhaps the journo had to nip to the toilet at that point. Could happen to anyone. So, do I believe the claims now being made by these people that they were so outraged that they threatened to resign but, er, didn't, or do I believe the quote from the letter Walker wrote at the time? Should we accept the account they are now giving on the grounds that you think that honesty and integrity must be necessary parts of their makeup, or do we believe what Walker wrote at the time? It's not really a hard call, is it?

Another ref - I think Jeff Winter - has been on R5 saying that because Gabby's direction at the moment of the foul was not directly towards goal but slightly to one side, there's scope for not giving a red. And that stuff about last man etc doesn't come into the rule. So we was defending it on the technicality of the rule rather than what most people understand the rule to be aimed at. He also said that refs will apply common sense and be mindful of the occasion, which means that the ref will give himself time to think and look for a reason not to send someone off, which is a strange one because he is saying that different standards of rules apply for different matches, which I would have thought goes against the whole ethos of the game. Though he did say it should have been at least a yellow.

Thought this was a balanced account: Aston Villa matched United all over the pitch, but were undone by the human force of nature known as Wayne

What a surprising view. I thought we were up for it today, generally played well, put them under pressure probably more than most teams they play, and made chances. We looked a bit tired at the end, and didn't make the most of the chances created. But we looked competitive, threatening, and played our full part in what was a pretty entertaining game.

The tackle itself was a foul, but Warnock was fouled by Lee hitting him in the face before the tackle was made. I assume the ref didn't see that bit, rather than deciding it was a fair challenge. It looked quite deliberate, the way that Heinze used to do a rugby handoff every time someone ran past him, while looking the other way to make it seem accidental.

I think it's appalling. Today we equalled our record for goals conceded during prem games at home. How shit is that? It's just lucky that so many teams are worse than us, or else we'd be relegated.

He's been very disappointing, but the goals really did seem to make a big difference in how he was playing. Definitely more confident and adventurous once he'd scored. I suppose he's had a difficult time with a long term injury and then trying to get fit and in form, but I hadn't been too impressed with him. If he can play a few games like most of today's second half, I'll be very happy with that.

Just hit the left pedal. How will the clutch help? Automatic?

Yes perhaps bad example.... Eggs... You get the idea though... If you just want two eggs, you need to hand around outside a supermarket and ask someone going in if they will buy a whole pack and sell you two when they come out.

Might be a good time to get a good deal on a Toyota, though.

Who's Gavin Masala? :winkold: Some recipes may also call for green cardamom, black cardamom, fennel seeds, mustard seeds, black onion seeds. This book has some great recipes, if you don't mind a mix of old favourites and some innovation.

A Xsara? The C4 Picasso is supposed to be better. But the C3 Picasso gets the best reviews. Don't think there are many second hand yet, it was only launched a few months ago. The 1.6 diesel pays £35 a year road tax, apparently.

Have you entered the Guardian competition? This month, the theme is macro, and I think it closes on Monday.

Rob, I think this may need a bit more explanation.

They're great. Also like and

Well I went for 70-80%, and I'm very much a MON supporter. It's true the standard of marking is getting softer these days.

Rob, doesn't that merit the award of a pic of a solid defender in a refuse receptacle three or four times just on your own account, never mind the times other people have posted it?

At the start of the season, 4 points would have been a very acceptable prospect. But after 20 minutes of the second game, with the situation as it was then, it's a real disappointment. It would have been OK if we'd played better and still not been able to break them down, but that really wasn't a good performance.

I thought so. Held his arm and pulled him down, like a judo hold.

I've got twenty quid on this, and I don't think I'll be collecting.

I suspect it was the use of the term "Paki"before committing the assault which gives a clue.