bridge too far

Or he disappears himself because he's scared he'll be accused, based on his past record, because he happened to be in the area at the same time?

I have to say, I was very anti PFI especially as my team had worked so hard to plan a viable Treasury funded option that was disbanded in favour of the privately financed option. The basic premise of PFI was centred around risk. The NHS takes out 30 year mortages for want of a better description and, at the end of the term, can walk away from the buildings if they are no longer fit for purpose (as they surely will be given the huge changes in the delivery of health services already). Also, many hospitals were ancient and unable to deliver safe and cost effective services but the government just couldn't afford to stump up for the necessary improvements. The developer runs the risk of being left, at the end of the mortgage, with empty buildings that are very specific in potential use unlike, say, an empty office block. But the very big downside was, in my view, the associated provision of hard and soft FM. As part of the deal, the developer's consortium provided these services. Not only did this lead to cost cutting in services such as catering, cleaning, maintenance etc. it also led to the deterioration in the working conditions for these services' already low paid workers but indeed led to many redundancies and the loss of staff who took with them huge experience and dedication. And, already, thanks to the Tories' reconfiguration of health services, many of these buildings only 15 years old are already being mothballed. Labour did try to introduce alternative methods of providing state of the art health buildings such as an idea called Procure21 that tied developers to an agreed cost and time envelope where any build savings were shared with the NHS and developers were punished if the building was late or over budget. As ever, developers continue to exploit changes to specifications and requests for information.

I don't usually disagree with you Pap but I have to correct you on this one! PFI was first mooted for the NHS in 1994 by the then Major government. I know this to be true as I worked on one of the first tranche of schemes. The first scheme was IIRC the Norfolk and Norwich hospital. I worked on a scheme in High Wycombe and the planning was well underway when the election was called in 1997. A moratorium was imposed (technically the Treasury cannot approve / monitor schemes during an election period) but it was lifted when Labour was elected. Labour can't be accused of inventing PFI but, for sure, it continued it. However, it did revisit the financing of such schemes. In the original schemes, the 'rent' was calculated on the outset costs of the building and, ususally, the hard and soft FM for the building. Because the outset costs were calculated on the cost of borrowing for the scheme developer, the costs were very high as loans to developers for buildings not yet constructed were very high. The developers then refinanced the schemes once the buildings were up and running and this put a lot of money in their pockets. Labour changed the rules so that savings from refinancing were distributed between the developer and the NHS.

And another one quitting the cabinet because he got photographed his todger and sent it to women (a Sunday Mirror sting apparently). And a Bishop resigning because he's been a naughty boy. We're doomed I tell 'ee - doomed.

Only a bellend I would imagine

This might spike their plans http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/sport-headlines/spurs-takeover-off-after-bidders-watch-them-play-2014092691094

I'm related to him too!

Or, of course, the wife could be the breadwinner and the husband could stay at home. Don't stereotype old chap!

Sometimes, when people have their first child, they CAN afford to raise it. Then, unforseen circumstances intervene (job loss, bereavement, major accident or illness) and suddenly they're no longer in such a position. What should happen to those children? Take them into care? Adoption? Workhouse?

On a par with overweight men wearing football shirts in public, really.

Well that wish has come true!

What criteria would YOU suggest then?

You can get cream for that, surely?

I always knew I was a princess!

Tough one - I'd find it hard to choose between Barcelona, Athens and Bruges. Love them all for different reasons.

I just hate the fact that Tesco is driving small independent 'corner shops' out of business. I could walk to 3 Tesco Locals in 5 minutes, not that I ever would. It's no wonder they're losing money really; there are only so many stores they can build in a locality before they reach saturation point and don't gain additional business. I also dislike the fact that they pay **** wages and their stores are really outdated.

Might go to Stokenchurch - about 5 miles away. But, given it's over in a flash, I might not

I must have missed this when it was first published. Very clever! Jamie - you haven't quite got the gist of the article, have you

Rickie on

Here's an article showing that it's not just white girls being abused. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/29/-sp-untold-story-culture-of-shame-ruzwana-bashir I know I've said this already, but the whole issue of abuse of children needs to be examined in great depth. Quite rightly, the Rotherham cases have hit the headlines but this has meant the suppression of other stories equally harrowing. Just this week I've read 3 cases priests and teachers abusing tens of young boys each. When on earth is the Home Secretary going to announce the replacement head of enquiry (Butler-Sloss)? Child sexual abuse is endemic in this country and is not confined to Pakistani heritage communities.

Subaru Impreza

I think he has a habit of shooting himself in the foot. He was the one who instigated the enquiry into MPs' expenses and then was found to have breached the rules During the 2009 expenses scandal, the Daily Telegraph published his expenses showing he had claimed, amongst other things, a £655 'love seat'[26] and had flipped his second home to avoid capital gains taxation. Carswell admitted to expensing "an armchair, sofa and some bedding, as well as a few other modest items of crockery and furniture" but claimed that he could justify these expenses. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Carswell

It's 21:16 ATM

WHO wants to ban the use of them in indoor public spaces http://news.sky.com/story/1324805/call-for-e-cigarettes-to-be-banned-indoors