shetlandpeat

These folks may help... http://www.mcofs.org.uk/assets/wild%20camping%20advice%201011.pdf

More than £5

If you have ever dealt with Cope, they too are selective. So, they too took what they thought was of worth to them. Though, they did get additional items of high value that would benefit the organisation. Much did go into the skip or the metal recyclers. If you looked at the price some items raised at the auction house, I would have thought that Cope would have realised more if they had sold it, as well as benefiting someone who was in greater need perhaps. However, they were grateful for the donations. We were happy to help.

No mate. Though remembering the speed our Dad got on dial up from the local provider in Lerwick, it has sadly taken far too long for it to catch up. Keep pestering folk.

I have quite good results here South, however, as with PC speeds, you will soon think it slow regardless of the original comparison. 1997 - 14kb/s 2014 http://www.speedtest.net/result/3522144446.png Yet this can still seem very slow when in a hurry. Providers still deliberately slow down the transfer of large files, such as my radio show, I guess this is to allow more adverts to be shown on the Cloud links.

Your solvency could dictate VFM. After all, it is what luxuries are about really. If I could afford to own and run a car, I would, however at the present, it would not represent VFM as I would have to go without something else, so, I ride a pushbike. The pushbike represents VFM as I keep fit, do not pollute my environment, save time (takes longer to drive to and from work than it does to ride), I get to say hello to more folk, helped me to stop smoking, my smiles are returned, it uses one tin of 3 in 1 every 2 years, I have more money to spend on other things and I feel far better for it. If it did not, I would then consider walking to work. What I found with Cope was they were very helpful when we were clearing out our Dads house when he went into care. The levels of understanding were there for the situation we were in. Although I would have liked to give everything to them, we had to send some items to the auction house, which, personally was regrettable, the levels of understanding were replaced by money and profit (the auction house VFM policy)

Several charities that have shops use paid management. That way, the shop is open when it needs to be. If run by volunteers, the contractual side of what is in effect, a business may not be fulfilled. Volunteers could decide not to volunteer and the shop remains shut, yet may still have to pay the reduced rates (normally 10%) if at all charged. There seems to be this perception that folk should drop everything to volunteer and be glad to do it. Being a volunteer is hard work, my volunteering enables others to lead a better life or helps to raise funds, some times both. It is limited as volunteering does not pay. I would think you would find it hard to contract someone into volunteering without some sort of lever.

How will this affect the Transition Group with future bids? I know that in some cases you only get one shot at Lottery Funding. The EU are always up for these sorts of projects, as you have the part funding already in place, it may help. They have already spent money in Shetland, via the North Islands New Energy Systems with the Power Station in Lerwick, Sheap and the Quantum heating system. It may be worth getting to look at this as it will be the first. We have similar problems here with attendance, plenty of willing though. http://ec.europa.eu/avservices/video/player.cfm?ref=I085341

No Charts? Fine them!

Perception of expensive is directly linked to how much money you are able to afford, more importantly, what you may have to go without to obtain such items. To some, things that many see as affordable, are not.

It seema however no one wants to invest, or they could have been there. Currently, where I am, it is looking as if we need to spend more than £70 million on a suitable bridge to span a river, in 4 years time, after the feasability study, it will be abour £84 Million. With no one willing to invest, it will be difficult to see happen. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/annie-wants-tunnel-connecting-island-2343268 How much does it cost to run the tunnels, I know the Mersy tunnel has a system of ventilation systems, you are also not to carry any flamables or explosives. Will there be the support from south? The Danes are not to happy with the current spend on the Islands, some are going as far as demanding the 1.1 billion Euros that the islands owe which closely represents the cost of tunnes and bridges, many of which were built before the 1980s, those built in the 60's would not be suitable I would think, there is enough confusion with passing places already it has been noted on here. http://www.spiegel.de/international/postcard-from-the-faroe-islands-copenhagen-s-tunnel-tummyache-a-416897.html

Bit picky with that, the reason hand guns were banned in the main was to do with the Snowdrop Petition, where witha few exceptions, they were banned. An indication on how dangerous they could be was the fact that ex-police and other public bodies in Northern Ireland were exempt as they needed protection. Paul, why are you warning me, FFS, it has nothing to do really what is going on here. UKIP want weapons, and to be available. If you look at their pedigree, you will see that their stance is far worse, as they want to do much more than any other party has. As for border, get real, do you honestly think that this will really happen? It will be no different to any other country outside of the EU. There will always be folk who will take advantage. You will be a seperate country, those who reside in Scotland will have to register their air weapons, those who don't will not have to. Similar to driving a car or any other vehicle. However, in Europe, you can drive from one end to the other with the same license and insurance, same MOT and car, you may have to adjust the headlights. If Scotland becomes independant, are you honestly suggesting that anythig will really change that would bother most ordinary residents, of course, there will be those who think themselves special. You are already turning an independant Scotland into some sort of 1984 set.

UKIP want to curtail the rights of women. You need to understand Robbie that if the legislation comes in without any opposition with compromise, you will get the wost case senario. As for compensation, you are talking about a weapon that was outlawed due to the numbers of killings with said weapon. Air weapons are not going to be outlawed, just registered. As for border controls, perhaps they are so small a thing to worry about. I mean, do you think that there is going to be an air weapon tourist industry, of a wrath of addressed just south of the border with hundreds of air weapon owners registered there. To be hones, it is tiny when it comes to the wider issue and numbers. Is there any mapping of air weapon ownership and does it show a hgh proliferation along the border?

I think that has been addressed. The trouble is, these folk who are to be chastised for doing what they think is best have been put there by the ordinary citizens of Scotland, as with any democracy, that can appear very slim. I feel that this law will be made, we are in a place where total opposition may be fruitles and will have to go with what is the best we can get. Registration may be the compromise as it would not need the full involvement of the dwindling Police Force, the fee could be added to new sales and a good time for those to register themselves as owners, say 2 years. That I believe will give plenty of time. It is now up to you Robbie, as a voter to petition your MSP. As we all know, he is the only one that can represent you.

The real point is could there then be a change to obtaining a air weapon different to a firearm. As pointed out in previous posts, many of these air weapons will have just one owner, thus reducing the costs. I am not sure where you get £100 million, when, if you do the sums to the exact figure, it will be less than 90, however, 100 million sounds better and has 3 numbers in it. I am not so sure about your Nazi comparison... from Wiki I my self cannot see the comparison, you may have been better to make the link with a dictatorship, though many of them kill their opponents. It will be air weapon owners who will have the choice, get the paperwork or lose the weapon. After all, it is not like they do not know it may be on its way. So, a system to register ownership of such weapons may be favorable, I would support that, especially as it will significantly reduce the costs.

You really have missed the argument there. You did claim that 600,000 new weapons would have to have a piece of paper to own them, now, if the piece of paper is subject to similar rules than, in theory, remembering your figures, the additional 600,000 (your figures) would cost £90 million pounds to administer. Would it then be feasable to expect the tax payer to foot that bill or should the full charge be levied upon those 600,000 (your figures) who now need the said piece of paper. Now, just in case you could not grasp the jist, does this not show that the present way of producing pieces of paper cannot be used to cover air weapons? Remember, this number is already in existence, the VAT for these has already been paid and sum at the lower rate of 15% and some may even have had the VAT claimed bach through a business. I do not need to obtain pieces of paper to run, jump, let loose an arrow, ice skate, ski, throw a metal ball, balance or any other sport that does not need a piece of paper to do.

Great, That explains why the public are contributing about £150 for every piece of paper allowing some one to own and keep say a Purdy. Regardless of minor issues with terminology will we be expected to pay for pieces of paper to own an air weapon as well or are the Government going to address the £17 million cost. Perhaps the full price should be extracted?

I have read that the shotgun licence cost is about one quarter of the actual cost of issue. The tax payer has been subsidising the issue of the licensing of shotguns for years. The minister responsible for this had a request to increase the fee turned down by Cameron recently. It may be the case that the way licenses are issued will have to be looked at if any change to firearms licensing is introduced. Personally I feel that the charge for shotgun licensing should increase to reflect the cost. Currently the bill to the public purse is £17 million. When you think how much can be spent on shotguns, I doubt it will affect some.

The house we sold in Lerwick recently went very well, we had some wierd offers from developers. We sold to someone we knew via another close friend and it all went very well, everyone was happy. As for being blackmailed, tis poo poo. You pay wat you can afford, if you do not want to bid up, you are right, continue waiting. What you are suggesting does not exist. You do not have to buy.

Wheely bins cost around £40 retail, and I would be sure there would be a huge discount for a council and as well the lack of VAT. If you then work out the cost of labour to pick up and carry the bags, the spillages, the rubbish spread by hungry wildlife and the piles of rubbish that can block the pavements at times, using wheely bins can be a common sense route to collection and segregation of rubbish. You would only need 3 in a crew as there is very little lifting involved with a wheely bin, when they are delivered, a contract is in place to say that you will look after the bin, even though it is not yours, you are responsible for it. There are few issues with wheely bins, we use 4 here, this makes collecting recyclables cost effective. We have had our wheely bins now since 2006. We have not had to replace them and the collection rate is up to 99.6% over the year throughout the borough. Flats and houses that are down long ginnels have communal bins, something they do in Brighton for much of the waste collection. I have not found anywhere where it says the council has to supply and vessel for waste. Those that do generally do it for their own convenience or as an additional service.

I didn't say it was bad because it's not a fancy shop. I said the food, whilst passable, isn't the greatest by a long shot. It's "popular" because for the many workers in the area there's no alternative close by and they don't have the time to traips into town. It is a road side cafe for want of a better word. Due to their set up, they can deliver your "meal" at reasonable speed. The parking is good as well, I think that is part of the reason for its popularity. No where to park a HGV in town. The food must be OK, I have not seen any issues raised by any Health inspections as I have seen with one or two others in town.

Talking to BAE staff, I have found out that if there is a Yes Vote and Scotland does become stand alone, it will render the employees of BAE in Scotland overseas workers, this in turn will affect their pension both North of the border and also for those South. Overseas Pension funds have to be self funding, BAE will not be able to push funds north, the pensioners in Scotland will see their pension pots dwindle quite quickly. The other issue there is that the BAE Pension fund owns quite a large chunk if the infrastructure in Lancashire. This was transferred to them to keep the fund fluid. With the current proposals to turn both Samlesbury and Warton sites into EZs this will boost the funds to a huge level, yet none will be transferred. So those who work for a company whose pension is based in England, Wales or Cornwall and live and work in Scotland would need to think on how this could affect their own funds. Also with the GOV wanting folk to be able to pull their pot from the fund and invest how they see fit could add additional burdens.

Similar things are happening here where I am, local councils are given the chance to be in a position to do their own work with funds from building yet at a district level, they have signed their section up for infrastructure and need the local money to deliver other promises, they are now looking at extracting the community funds to do this. . Regardless of other thoughts on here, I have always thought of the islands around Great Britain to have a bond. This has been demonstrated in the past. As there is a possibility that Scotland could vote yes (regardless of party politics) it would be right that the outer regions should work together to protect their interests and retain their control on their own assets and communities. It seems to be a similar struggle for many communities all over the country. I totaly agree with the points Kavi made (and well made too). The appethy could do more damage. It is fine to gesticulate on these such forum, more however needs to be done. The councillors I know of at S.I.C. are good folk, they do want to see Shetland remain Shetland, however, they need the support on this matter to mandate the thoughts of the folk, and not have to rely on assumptions, which they will be subject to scorn (and some quite vile) later.

I think the larger amount quoted in the paper is the cost of the prescribed items and it could have been made clearer in the report.

Perhaps you should debate with UKIP candidates, you may think differently. Their policies are haphazard. As for the fishing, even though, on paper it bring in over one hundred million already, how much of that will filter back through to the population? I recall that most of the fishing processes, from net to transport are not publicly owned. How many are owned by companies either signed up to EU agreements or are part of it? As the UK trades through the EU to many countries, how will that affect the trade from Shetland? As for immigration, it is a know fact that it benefits the country more than it costs. You will lose a huge chunk of NHS staff, Doctors who have the experiance of medicines abroad as we are so proud of where we live, we cannot wait to go to foreign lands for a break and catch tropical infections. Many oil workers, merchant seamen, fisherfolk are from off UK soil. I agree that controls should remain, but not so to strangle the country. Shetland has thrived from immigration, without it, how would all you have hapen?