Thread: Part P needed?
View Single Post
  #32   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
John Rumm John Rumm is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 25,191
Default Part P needed?

Pete Verdon wrote:

Well, I shall feel a lot happier about any Part-P-ignoring work I may do
in the future, and a hell of a lot less happy about the whole issue in
general. I'd previously assumed misguided good intentions; the above
looks a lot more like actual malice.


To an extent I have some sympathy with the LAs here in that the daft
legislation really has put them between a rock and a hard place for the
reasons outlined in that link.

However I do believe that they should be forced to swallow it anyway
wherever possible, since it will create additional pressure to get it
removed.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/