The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

Anyone know more?

The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

On 15 Nov 2006 08:15:38 -0800, wrote:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

Err, it wasn't to be a bill, but 'will publish proposals to reform the
planning system'. I guess that'll mean any changes won't happen in the life
of this parliament.

--
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:33:07 GMT, Guy King
wrote:

The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

What ? And go without the peerage that Our Glorious Leader has
promised her ?


--
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd. http://www.pherber.com/
http://www.sandrila.co.uk/

The Wanderer wrote:
On 15 Nov 2006 08:15:38 -0800, wrote:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

Err, it wasn't to be a bill, but 'will publish proposals to reform the
planning system'. I guess that'll mean any changes won't happen in
the life of this parliament.

Nor in the lives of anyone here probably!

next time we hear of it it will be called, 'the feasability study into
working out the possibility and plausability of forming a study group for
looking into the proposals of possible reform to the planning system', IE
just another mechanism for swallowing vast amounts of cash while doing
nothing.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:33:07 GMT, Guy King wrote:

|The message .com
|from " contains these words:
|
| The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
| info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
| year".
|
|I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
|shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
|out.

She does just that
"My government will ....................."
"My government will ....................."
"My government will ....................."
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:55:57 GMT, Phil L wrote:

The Wanderer wrote:
On 15 Nov 2006 08:15:38 -0800, wrote:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

Err, it wasn't to be a bill, but 'will publish proposals to reform the
planning system'. I guess that'll mean any changes won't happen in
the life of this parliament.

Nor in the lives of anyone here probably!

next time we hear of it it will be called, 'the feasability study into
working out the possibility and plausability of forming a study group for
looking into the proposals of possible reform to the planning system', IE
just another mechanism for swallowing vast amounts of cash while doing
nothing.

Nah, that's all been done. Actually I looked up the briefing paper issued
by the PM's Office, and it seems as though it's primarily aimed at LAs, to
speed up the time to get planning decisions. Didn't see anything
immediately relating to building regs, etc. Time will tell......

--
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

She's a lady of dignity but I'm sure she must feel like doing it.

Mary

In message , Guy King
writes
The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

The trials and tribulations of a constitutional monarch, eh ?

"Yes Ma'am, but ... just take the money and keep yer gob shut"


--
geoff

In message , Mary Fisher
writes

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

She's a lady of dignity but I'm sure she must feel like doing it.

She's a parasite


--
geoff

wrote in message
oups.com...
The Queens speech snip

Is all Political bollox designed to make the sad ****s that think the
"Royalty" have something useful to offer Britain.

Lets face it...........If the Royals can't have their say and change things
and the Gov'mnt cant do it either, who the **** *is* going to sort out
England?

Probably the foreigners that are constantly sponging off the "Free State"
that *IS* England!

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

Anyone know more?

My apologies, I should have added "If you don't have any further
information regarding this particular proposal, please feel free to
have an inarticulate, bigoted rant on some barely related topic". We'd
all love to hear about that enormous chip on the shoulder you have.

Phil L wrote:
The Wanderer wrote:
On 15 Nov 2006 08:15:38 -0800, wrote:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

Err, it wasn't to be a bill, but 'will publish proposals to reform the
planning system'. I guess that'll mean any changes won't happen in
the life of this parliament.

Nor in the lives of anyone here probably!

next time we hear of it it will be called, 'the feasibility study into
working out the possibility and plausibility of forming a study group for
looking into the proposals of possible reform to the planning system', IE
just another mechanism for swallowing vast amounts of cash while doing
nothing.

I watched the story of the Herald of Free Enterprise that night and
listened to the pie eater in chief giving us moral outrage about the
safety design and valuable promises about what that lot of scammers
would do if it were them.

The narrator went on to point out that the ships still don't have to
have bow door safety controls installed. But at least it gave the
Labour party a chance to bone up on not getting any government
department covered in poo whenever they hold an inquiry.

They may be sock puppets and spin doctors but they know how to ruin a
country properly. They could almost be Tories.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Weatherlawyer"
saying something like:

I watched the story of the Herald of Free Enterprise that night and
listened to the pie eater in chief giving us moral outrage about the
safety design and valuable promises about what that lot of scammers
would do if it were them.

The narrator went on to point out that the ships still don't have to
have bow door safety controls installed. But at least it gave the
Labour party a chance to bone up on not getting any government
department covered in poo whenever they hold an inquiry.

What I also found priceless was the former CE of TT whinging on about
'it wasn't our fault the Dept of Floating Bits passed the tubs as safe
without door indicators'.

Several times his own people had raised an internal requirement about
door indicators and his company had ignored it. To be fair to the man,
he'd only just taken on the job, but the blame for the lack of action
rested squarely with top management.
--

Dave

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "
saying something like:


My apologies, I should have added "If you don't have any further
information regarding this particular proposal, please feel free to
have an inarticulate, bigoted rant on some barely related topic".

**** off, this is usenet. IBrants are the meat and drink of it and
provide entertainment for countless dozens out there.
--

Dave

"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
ups.com...

They may be sock puppets and spin doctors but they know how to ruin a
country properly. They could almost be Tories.

You are a clear sycophant. The best government this country has had in
history is this current government. The sooner the LibDems push the Tories
to one side the better we all be.

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

If it said an open planning system and land reform the parasite certainly
would throw it back. What is it? Still only pays a voluntary 10% tax. In
the 1980s when 1000s were living on the streets she paid NO tax at all and
kept all her lolly. How the average British citizen puts up with
anachronistic crap which holds us back is beyond me.

wrote in message ...
On 15 Nov,
Guy King wrote:

The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

I wonder what she'd do if it read something like "My Givt plans to abolish
the Monarchy." would she go along with that, or abolish the lot of them
(to
the tower?)?

Those scumbags will do everything to stay in clover. A high percentage of
the army are regiments that protect the monarchy. She would think nothing
of ordering troops to slaughter normal people for her own self-interest.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

She's a lady of dignity but I'm sure she must feel like doing it.

Of course she would if it means she loses one penny.

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , Mary Fisher
writes

"Guy King" wrote in message
.. .
The message .com
from " contains these words:

The Queens speech made mention of a planning reform bill. No further
info on BBC News website other than "details will be published next
year".

I'm amazed she doesn't stand up in the middle and throw the lot at them,
shouting "Sod this, I'm not putting my name to all this crap" and storm
out.

She's a lady of dignity but I'm sure she must feel like doing it.

She's a parasite

Well said Maxie! Well said!!

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "
saying something like:

My apologies, I should have added "If you don't have any further
information regarding this particular proposal, please feel free to
have an inarticulate, bigoted rant on some barely related topic".

**** off, this is usenet. IBrants are the meat and drink of it and
provide entertainment for countless dozens out there.
It is not that I am defending the Queen, but have you not noticed that
only the ordinary peeps pay death duties, it is not just the Queen who
evades them, all the powerful people do as well, how else do they keep
their power? As they have the power behind the scenes the death duty
laws, enabling them to evade it will never be altered.

"Broadback" wrote in message
...
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "
saying something like:

My apologies, I should have added "If you don't have any further
information regarding this particular proposal, please feel free to
have an inarticulate, bigoted rant on some barely related topic".

**** off, this is usenet. IBrants are the meat and drink of it and
provide entertainment for countless dozens out there.
It is not that I am defending the Queen, but have you not noticed that
only the ordinary peeps pay death duties, it is not just the Queen who
evades them, all the powerful people do as well, how else do they keep
their power? As they have the power behind the scenes the death duty
laws, enabling them to evade it will never be altered.

The Queen uphold a ruling privileged class. She has to go and a meritocracy
installed.

Broadback wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "
saying something like:

My apologies, I should have added "If you don't have any further
information regarding this particular proposal, please feel free to
have an inarticulate, bigoted rant on some barely related topic".

**** off, this is usenet. IBrants are the meat and drink of it and
provide entertainment for countless dozens out there.
It is not that I am defending the Queen, but have you not noticed that
only the ordinary peeps pay death duties, it is not just the Queen who
evades them, all the powerful people do as well, how else do they keep
their power? As they have the power behind the scenes the death duty
laws, enabling them to evade it will never be altered.

Dead people don't keep power mutt.

Rich people organoise tpo have their cash mountains invested in things
that dohe Bermudas, outside tax laws.

Its funny to hear the anti-toff brogade now getting upset about death
duties - once the most vicious of the anti-toff legislation ever
introduced, which caused the demise of most of the large estates in this
country.

As a typical example of an asset tax, along with car tax, council tax
and the like, its just another way to make sure no one can own anything
that doesn't produce enough value to pay for its tax, or lasts long
enough to be worth something when they die.

They should all be scrapped.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Its funny to hear the anti-toff brogade now getting upset about death
duties - once the most vicious of the anti-toff legislation ever
introduced, which caused the demise of most of the large estates in this
country.

Demise of large estates? Propaganda. 0.66% of the population own 790% of
the land, predominantly aristocrats. We are still a banana republic in many
cases, and land ownership is one.

As a typical example of an asset tax, along with car tax, council tax and
the like, its just another way to make sure no one can own anything that
doesn't produce enough value to pay for its tax, or lasts long enough to
be worth something when they die.

They should all be scrapped.

Yep and introduce Land value Tax (LVT), which is getting a bigger following
by the hour.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...


0.66% of the population own 790% of the land

Please explain what this means??

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:34:08 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

0.66% of the population own 790% of
the land


You made that up.



--

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Malcolm H"
saying something like:


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
freenews.net...


0.66% of the population own 790% of the land

Please explain what this means??

It's Drivelnomics. The New Science of Wishful Revolutionary Thinking.
--

Dave

Matt wrote:
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:34:08 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

0.66% of the population own 790% of
the land


You made that up.



Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.

The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.

While technically true, it makes bugger all difference to every day life.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 20:39:14 GMT, Guy King wrote:

|The message
|from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:
|
| Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.
|
|While technically true, it makes bugger all difference to every day life.

That was true in 1066, but since then Kings and Queens have sold off most
of the land to us common erks.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...


0.66% of the population own 790% of the land

Please explain what this means??

0.66% of the population own 70% of the land

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Malcolm H"
saying something like:


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
dfreenews.net...


0.66% of the population own 790% of the land

Please explain what this means??

It's

And he walks around with name like that.

"Matt" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:34:08 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

0.66% of the population own 790% of
the land


You made that up.

Lord Hall, I never.

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.

While technically true, it makes bugger all difference to every day life.

It does big style.

In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Its funny to hear the anti-toff brogade now getting upset about death
duties - once the most vicious of the anti-toff legislation ever
introduced, which caused the demise of most of the large estates in
this country.

Demise of large estates? Propaganda. 0.66% of the population own 790%
of the land, predominantly aristocrats.


Saved for posterity


--
geoff

In message , Mike
writes
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:05:29 GMT, "Malcolm H" wrote:


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
dfreenews.net...


0.66% of the population own 790% of the land

Please explain what this means??

Yes - like where's the extra 690% located?

In the boot of his Prius

Oops can't be there, there's no room besides the batteries

--
geoff

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , Mike
writes
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:05:29 GMT, "Malcolm H" wrote:


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
adfreenews.net...


0.66% of the population own 790% of the land

Please explain what this means??

Yes - like where's the extra 690% located?

In the boot of his Prius

Oops can't be there, there's no room besides the batteries

Oh Maxie! You a such a fabulist.

The message ews.net
from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:

Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.

While technically true, it makes bugger all difference to every day life.

It does big style.

What's it changed about the way I lived my life today?

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message ews.net
from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:

Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.

While technically true, it makes bugger all difference to every day
life.

It does big style.

What's it changed about the way I lived my life today?

Read
Who Own Britain by Kevin Cahill and
Who Runs Britain by Jerwemy Paxman

For starters. Come back when read for clarification of points.

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 20:39:14 GMT, Guy King wrote:

|The message
|from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:
|
| Indeed. The queen owns 100% of the land. In the UK.
|
|While technically true, it makes bugger all difference to every day life.

That was true in 1066, but since then Kings and Queens have sold off most
of the land to us common erks.

Unfortunately _not_ true ! Sovereigns have granted _holdings_ to 'us common
erks'. The land remains the property of the Crown. Where do you think the
wording Free-Hold; Lease-Hold; Crown-Hold; etc.etc. originate?

--

Brian