And once all that traffic has "flowed" through Barnton, where will it go Nick?
Where will it go?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
Today's Nick Cook frothing
(453 posts)-
Posted 6 years ago #
-
No no no.
It’s not about ‘purpose’.
It’s about #TrafficFlow.
And not ‘causing pollution’ by being stationary.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The Gullcatcher General is *outraged* that Lesley Macinnes is showing signs of a sense of humour.
https://mobile.twitter.com/cllrnickcook/status/989782625916194818
Posted 6 years ago # -
There is a survivors' guide to urban gulls, but not a survivors' guide to urban traffic?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Poor wee soul, my eight year old kids are harder to wind up.
(and could probably produce a more coherent and sensible transport policy).Posted 6 years ago # -
@IWRATS, I hope Cllr Cook has read this section. Wouldn't want any unlicensed vigilante action now, would we?
---
The Law
Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, it is illegal to capture, injure or destroy any wild bird, or interfere with its nest or eggs. Penalties can be severe.
However, the law also provides a general licence system, which allows property owners to take action against gulls nesting on buildings by destroying nests or eggs. This can ONLY be used for the purpose of preserving public health, public safety, and preventing the spread of disease and is specifically for the control of Herring, Black Backed and Lesser Black Backed gulls.
If action is taken for any other reason, or if other species of gull are targeted, then an offence is committed. More information can be found on Scottish Natural Heritage’s website: http://bit.ly/SNHgulls
Posted 6 years ago # -
"Exactly what point is he trying to make? "
Good question.
The point he makes, whether unwittingly or purposefully, is that by 9.03am on a weekday most single occupant drivists are already at work and there's not much traffic left to speak of until the mid-morning deliveries brigade of huge lorries arrive?
That alternative caption would pass the extended 280 char limit on Twitter, n'est-ce pas?
Posted 6 years ago # -
As far as I can see, the only nuisance that gulls cause is by pooping on precious expensive mostly-empty mostly-stationary private property parked on the public highway.
(Maybe that's why Nick is so interested in it)
Yes, a gull can steal your child's ice-cream. But so can a poorly controlled dog, owned by an OLA* citizen
*TM.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Shurely an OLADO (OLA Dog Owner)? Or maybe OLADW (OLA Dog Walker) as this latter term could include the burgeoning cottage industry of "professional" dog walkers, herding up to half a dozen mutts at a time on notionally "shared use" paths (notional because the aforementioned mutts and dog walker service industry operatives are monopolising the path).
Posted 6 years ago # -
I surprised Nick didn't up the anti by talking about extending the ring road round the back of Cammo and onto the A90 somewhere around Barnbougle.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Just for balance a different Tory Cllr -
Posted 6 years ago # -
Cllr Cook's 20mph "mantra" makes another appearance. Is there any substance to these unsupported claims?
Posted 6 years ago # -
No @crowriver - the research in Bath that has been trundled out by the frothers was widely debunked. Indeed the research was not that problematic (as I think it had evidence to back up speed limit reduction) just the interpretation by the frothing gammon tories of Somerset.
I have re-posted the authoritative research showing the link between lower speeds (though lowest in the research is 50Kmh) and reduced fatalities and casualties.
This lin is strong but that does not deter frothing gammon tories Oh lordy no.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The 20s plenty people usually have a good handle on these sort of claims and why they're almost always bogus.
Two of his points (the cost of implementation and drivers getting confused) are actually a good argument *for* Scotland wide 20mph limits. But why let logic get in the way of a bit of frothing?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Can someone explain "gammon"?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Pink faced older males - reactionary, right wing, pro-brexit. I think the original reference was to a Question Time audience being a 'wall of gammon'.
If you're brave, search #wallofgammon on twitter.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Posted 6 years ago #
-
”Two of his points (the cost of implementation and drivers getting confused) are actually a good argument *for* Scotland wide 20mph limits. But why let logic get in the way of a bit of frothing?”
Yep.
Posted 6 years ago # -
That Gammon Man illustration link is going on my phone for use as required.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Gammon Opinion Man by our Kappers above looks uncannily like Nick Cook, or his alter ego Nick Cooked Ham
Posted 6 years ago # -
Posted 6 years ago #
-
Required reading for Cllr Cook methinks.
---
Why seagulls are not angry - just 'misunderstood'
Junk food, it seems, is not only bad for humans, it might also be making birds more aggressive. Gulls are being studied by a PhD student from the University of St Andrews to find out if living in the city is changing their behaviour. Academic Rebecca Lakin is studying the impact of urban environments on young gulls. She thinks understanding why they act the way they do might change our perception of the birds.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-44051398
Posted 5 years ago # -
Nick Cook has eaten so much junk food (including gammon) he has turned into a seagull?
Posted 5 years ago # -
Is this thread a test of where the boundary for a Rule 1 breach is?
Anyone else think we are getting close?
Posted 5 years ago # -
Mods on standby.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@hankchief, could be? Thing is, quite likely to be more quotes from young Nick that might have to be discussed? But will try to keep this side of the line.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I agree with Hankchief and have nearly posted the same thing a couple of times.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Perhaps this thread can be marked as Sticky?
Posted 5 years ago # -
A Miles Briggs and Nick Cook Twitter double whammy!
Posted 5 years ago # -
Mindful of our rules - I despair that Nick Cook who is the Tory transport convener can be so short sighted. On BBC website piece about LEZs In his response to the admittedly detail lite CEC LEZs proposal he complains about lack of detail. He then goes on to sort of say any LEZ should not affect taxi drivers or other businesses. But that is the point of LEZs. He should really just spit it out - I do not want things to change as I am a conservative, I want cars to be able to drive anywhere and be free to emit what they want, people should just buy masks.if they can't afford them they should just accept they will die earlier than rich people. As businesses cannot be affected and nothing must change.
The tweet thing also would appear to reveal him as a wannabe misogynist. Not quite up to miles Briggs level yet?
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
