threegee

That's awful lot of zeros, and no benefit whatsoever to the North East. We only have vague promises that sometime somewhere we might see a few crumbs from the table. Now you'd have thought that the Labour Party would have opposed this vast public spend, or at least insisted on some balancing project to benefit their loyal supporters in the North East. But, they trotted into the lobbies last night like sheep to support Cameron. Why? Because they know that their support in Birmingham is a lot more tenuous than it is here! The North East is sucker bait for New Labour - that middle-class elitist party still trading on its working-class origins by pretending to be working class! If Labour had held out for the North East they could very easily have swung a major infrastructure project bringing much needed jobs. There were easily enough green-suburb Tories opposed to the mega-spend (ones who's constituents didn't want it in their back yards). Labour didn't because they have cynically calculated that they can get all the mindless support they need from working-class people in the North East, without doing anything at all for the area! UKIP is the only major party opposed to HS2, because it believes that the spend is unjustified, and that there are far better things to do with such a vast sum of public money than shave minutes off the travelling time of wealthy business people who'd work on the train anyway. http://www.ukip.org/aylesbury_s_tory_mp_bottles_hs2_vote This is what Ed Balls thinks about HS2: Whoops a "blank cheque" from Labour then! But, it's fine to wave it through as it buys some extra votes in the Midlands where Labour will really fight the next election. Mindless voting is the sure route to self-impoverishment!

All the fake psychics and conspiracy theorists are crawling out of the woodwork now, but that doesn't mean there isn't one! Knowing a tiny bit about Carlyle and Freescale there's certainly mileage in this particular one. You could go on to speculate that if you wanted to bury this one for good you'd arrange the searching to go on in the Southern Atlantic, and send a few misleading sonar signals to reinforce the belief that the aircraft must be there somewhere. That might seem crazy to most mortals, but anyone who has any inkling of the vast resources that Carlyle commands wouldn't have any difficulty believing that. How this company has accumulated so much wealth in so short a period beggars belief. That they have all the "connections" can not be in doubt. It surprised me that the Aussies were able to zero in on such a relatively small area so quickly on such tenuous data. This having happened, and the signature being so unique, then why all the subsequent confusion? Normally the sonar can take you there quickly and with reasonable precision.

LOL I'm going to have to look up insouciant! It's kick Nick time it seems: Now that sounds personal! I do think he should stop trotting out the three million jobs at risk garbage though. His source was back in 2000, and the academic he plucked the figure from says his figures are being misused - they don't mean that at all! So why keep repeating this when it's not actually true? It's rather like his claim that only 7% of our laws are made in Brussels - which he picked from a HoC document which specifically pointed out that it didn't include "orders in council" - how the mass of Euro diktats are promulgated. The true figure is well over 50%. Nick seems to have a way with the truth that doesn't involve reading past the first few convenient words into the inconvenient ones. An interesting book that serious LD's will need to read if they think any of their ideas will stand up to scrutiny. The guy seems to think the EU may be redeemable, but I'm not convinced. Certainly if Cameron goes to re-negotiate it will be a pre-arranged fix, and he will try to pull the same con trick as was pulled the last time by Labour. That a real (non-politicos', non-federalist) Common Market can be formed I've no doubt, there is plenty of will among the more democratic parts of Europe if the UK were to set the lead. And, it would rapidly see off the EU in terms of GDP growth - but that's not at all what the political classes want!

I tried to ignore it, honestly I did! But every time I went to iPlayer it was there staring back at me, and only three minutes! Curiosity overtook me and I watched - I am a politicoholic - there I've said it! Was it instructive? Well... yes, but not in the way intended. I've learned that however much all reason points the other way, it's still possible for a small group of individuals to ignore the overwhelming negatives and cling to a core of outdated, and positively self-damaging, ideas. Fresh from his drubbing at the hands of common sense and the real facts, personified by Nigel Farage, Nick was back reminding everyone that his is ONLY party that fully supports the EU - "we're the party of IN" he chirps, without giving any solid reasons why, or addressing any of dozens of reasons why not. Sure, they'd strung out an almost subliminal 3D graphic down a shopping street saying "3 MILLION JOBS"; a sort of paper mache religious icon, so true believers have a real-world instantiation, lest they start to disbelieve the immaculate conception. But here was a near-exclusive appeal to the heart and not to reason. That word fairness is creeping back into the LDs claims too. Yes, the UK electorate have short memories, but not THAT short Nick! This was the month that Danny Alexander was seen claiming that the recovery was as much his success as George Osborne's and positioning himself as the new party leader. The LDs sure need one, and quickly! But it's not going to happen until the inevitable drubbing at the polls. I strongly suspect that a new incarnation of the LD's will take a far more pragmatic approach to the EU. Danny won't want to remind us about his being "the party of IN", and will quite likely secretly wish that it was the party of OUT!

It should be called "non-intentional debt": - lender has no intention of charging reasonable interest, and borrower has no intention of keeping to the repayment schedule - or even repaying!

It's the debt that is personal not the data! "Anonymised" data they calls it. My theory on the Alnwick and Coldstream lot is that it's a result of all the fuel they charge to their credit cards in the desperate effort to get their 4x4s to the Metro Centre. A massive opportunity for Bedlington to promote its charging point I think; those country gents will be swapping their gas guzzlers out for electrics in scores! Anyone up for a green-wellie cleaning biz?

Dunno. Haven't had time to research the three main parties, and couldn't find out who the Lib Dems bank with either!

This is amusing: Top five personal loan hotspots by postcode BA1 9: Outskirts of BathEC1V 2: Shoreditch area of LondonNE66 4: Alnwick area of NorthumberlandPE7 0: Outskirts of PeterboroughTD12 4: Coldstream in the Scottish BordersNot Bedlington then! Full article: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27054416

http://www.price-drop.tv/ http://www.bid.tv/

The rats are deserting the ship now: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27137762 A classic we'll be taking our overdraft elsewhere! Probably just as well the Labour Party is in debt, as would you trust your funds to a bank totally controlled by trade unions?

Umm... the obvious question: How do you pronounce "Mrorrc"?

When I moved away I missed: looking out of the window thinking I really must cut the grass when it is dry enough!

Leave a space before the bracket (actually that type is called parenthesis) and it won't happen.

The link you provide is a solicitor offering genuine mitigation strategies, not a service to evade commercial rates. They repeatedly stress that the circumstances should be genuine (i.e. not manufactured to avoid). They also warn about illegal services: "Beware of scam tenancies offered on the web..". But you are entirely missing the point here, because as fourgee says you are looking at things one-sidedly. And, I most certainly don't think you, or indeed anyone else, is stupid! I do however think that you are misrepresenting the reality. Other people reading this may take away a slanted view of landlords, and just why properties are standing empty. There are plenty of people who will buy into such myths, because it suits their agenda, and deflects the blame from their own anti-business mindset. I don't think that this is what you intend, and I don't think you yourself are in any way anti-business. I get to see things from both sides, and, together with a lifetimes experience in retailing, often get provided with a peek into the commercial market in the North East from more than one of the well known names. Believe me the situation is little to do with greedy and stupid landlords asking unrealistic rents, and a lot more to do with a general lack of enterprise. There are failures on both sides; failures in local government; failures in national policy; and a lamentably low level of small enterprise, brought about by a century of carefully taught state dependency. It's not that there aren't just as many enterprising people here as elsewhere in the UK, it's just that the vast majority of them have - very understandably - given up on the North East. Just when there are a few glimmers of redemption (not the least from the Labour Party, the very architects of state dependency) there's a grave danger that we'll talk ourself back into our hole! That's why I'm challenging your view of unreasonable landlords. Back on subject I'd say that business rates are just a small part of running a business, and even the rents are (or should be) dwarfed by employment costs. Did your associate produce a fully-worked business plan? If so (s)he'd have benefited by providing a copy to the prospective landlord(s). If nothing else (s)he might have got some useful feedback. Of course such a plan would have had to factor in the proprietors income expectations too. In real-world situations businesses never go to plan, but that doesn't mean that plans are a waste of time or unnecessary. They provide a much-needed benchmark. Some landlords - approached with the right mindset - can see, or be made to see, themselves as partners in the business, as they are effectively providing a very necessary part of the capital. They have an interest in the success of the business, and in bad times can often make necessary concessions if kept in-the-loop. What I detect here are hard-nosed take-it-or-leave-it attitudes, and I believe that one such response invites another. There's never finality in business, and being snubbed (or believing you've been) is no reason not to try again and again at later dates with modified propositions. And, it's often better to ask what the other parties aims and expectations are than ask the price. Going into a negotiation with a target price in mind is pointless unless you know exactly what you are going to receive for the money.

The current winner is fairly predictable, but there's still time to influence the result. Don't cheat by peeking before you vote! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10772109/The-top-50-BBC-Two-shows-of-all-time.html

I'm sure they actually meant to write vantage point, but you really can't expect a firm of highly paid architects to use propa English - like! http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vantage+point Massing and orientation is hoo them lot speak like. I mean if they said they thowt it was aboot the reet size an' pontin the reet way ordinary folks might not think they wa woorth the muney. And... to answer your AM I BEING TOO SCEPTICAL HERE question: Yes, you probably are. We have to grab at what is possible. It's a bit more new life in the old place. And, it's life that has to actually pass through/live in the town centre, and not jump into their cars and head directly for the A1 to get to/from work - plus do all their shopping at the Metro Centre. On the inconvenience: if you read the planning document you will find so many restrictions on what the builder has to/can't do it's a wonder any developer would even bother! You can't have it both ways: call the place "a ghost town" then object to any activity!

Ironic that the Co-op is foundering on the very thing it was set up to circumvent - self interest! Just like the Police Federation, the people at the helm won't accept change because it will impact on their own cushy existence. I didn't catch that Lord Myners has just joined the ever-increasing list of walk outs, but you don't really need to waste time seeking out his stated reasons. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/apr/17/co-op-group-loses-billions-failings-in-management The Co-op can't survive in its present form, and no one seems interested in reconstituting it as a viable business. Flog off the bits, and when the dust has settled re-brand them - all that can be salvaged is some shaky jobs here and there! All the aspirations of the public-spirited Bedlingtonians in those sepia photos have now completely turned to dust.

..takes revenge on all motor cars! http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-27058362 Sometimes we all feel like that!

Sorry, but that bit is nonsense! There are several reasons why a landlord wants to see a property occupied, and they are in no way insulated from market forces. But the quality of a tenant has to be taken into consideration too. Potential tenants who do all their homework have a much better chance of securing a better property; but few do, and you can't blame landlords for becoming jaded through hopeless propositions. Now Clive might not be the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, and he may not be the best business person in town, but he's not stupid. And, my point is going back at the right time - having done all the homework - will surely produce a deal. The property standing empty is costing him far more than the rates. I'm not aware of anyone in Bedlington who uses the occupancy rules simply to avoid business rates. It's generally asking for hassle, but if you spot any be sure to name and shame here. The sort of thing you mention is criminal, because the occupancy then attracts rates immediately, and if there is intention not to pay then that's fraud. Anyone who even offered such a "service" would be open to criminal charges, and any participating landlord would be complicit.

You need to select what site area you are searching on with the grey button before hitting the green search magnifier, else it will return too many results. One of the 2010 links I can spot: http://www.bedlingto...y-adjourned-r58

Ah, but think of all the parking fines, and the warden jobs so created! 39 more two-car families - goodness, why did that car showroom close?!

I do hope Cleggie caught this C5 program: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/469953/Gypsies-on-Benefits-and-Proud-Romanian-gypsy-aims-to-earn-40-000-on-UK-handouts Totally unrepresentative of all the hard-working Romanians and Bulgarians flocking to the UK as we speak, to mop up all those jobs no one here really wants - of course! Or maybe that's only the case in the fantasy world Mr Clegg lives in?

Everything is negotiable! Keep going back to them regularly and offering what you reckon is a fair rent. Hopefully you'll catch them at a time when the Council Tax / Insurance / Repair bill land, and they'll then see the merits of someone else having to pay them. Saying that it's THE prime position in the town won't help your case either. There are lots of good positions in the town and it really depends what for. If it's not let then clearly it isn't THE prime position in the town for anything, at the rent they are asking!

The Old Vicarage is actually Grade II listed. To quote from the English Heritage guy who surveyed it: "If I have to see yet another Grade II listed building I will scream." He meant, of course, that they were going through a phase when everything that was old enough was being listed without any consideration of merit. Not that there's anything wrong with the Old Vicarage; it's a fine building that was built without much consideration of the cost - because the church at that time was flush with funds from the sale of the Glebe Lands. It will certainly be standing long after the New Vicarage is bulldozed. But it's not representative of the town in the past, and indeed not even that old. Nor is it in any way unique in itself. That's recognised in the Grade II; preservation on the cheap, as no public money is available. There's no doubt that Grade II listings need to be reviewed. Either they should be marked as worthy of public money, or be released from most of the restrictions. Like the Old Vicarage most will survive anyway, because they still serve a purpose into the 21st century and beyond. The entire conservation area is a bit of a joke anyway, because just about everything that was worth conserving was vandalised by none other than the very people who should have at least preserved some of the better examples. Some of these had been flagged up in surveys paid for with public money before the vandalisation, yet these were ignored when politically convenient. Bedlington is still a working town, and a working town that has had the raw-end of many political stitch ups. It isn't a twee village in the stockbroker belt with sky high property values, and almost all of the historical treasures have gone for good. It now needs to be able to regenerate with as few shackles as possible. Getting rid of the odd derelict and decrepit building that has long had its day should be just a start. We've got an enviable central position and should be screaming out for this to recognised in regional government decisions, not squabbling over the odd pile of nondescript stones.

The "silly woman with the big lips" is in deep do-do economically and has failed to deliver on any promises. Cameron is trailing in the polls with an election looming. A mutually convenient increase in tension coming up? Better still a teensy "invasion" that everyone can save face retreating from without too many casualties. Cynical? Me?! Now where did I put that Union Jack? http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26999735