Just because people live in a new house, it doesn't mean they shouldn't object to 500 additional houses being built next door, it was a bloody ridiculous idea, which thankfully seems to have been rejected (at least for now).
If East Riding schools weren't any good, there'd be no reason to combine the figures to improve the overall results, would there?
A new house on a former green field site? Get to ****, that's hauling the ladder up I'm alright Jack in anyone's language.
East Riding Schools tend to be better at completing the DofE returns. It doesn't necessarily make the school better.
I think you might have misunderstood that, the City Of Culture bid states that it aims to create 84 permanent jobs in the culture and visitor sectors, there was never any suggestion that it will will create thousands of jobs, it's a one off event for which 4,000 volunteers are expected to get involved. It's expected to generate an additional £60m for the Hull economy during 2017, I have no idea what the bid cost, but I suspect it was a tiny fraction of that amount.
I live in a West Hull village, my house has a current elevation of 28m above sea level, I think I'll be safe thanks.
Exactly I've even got family and friends who've moved out of the city and then started pulling it down big time. One of them used to hate people calling Hull and Bransholme in particular and the turn around in her attitude against hull is quite startling
Increasing the amount of houses in a village by 30% is a dramatic change to the dynamic of the place and it's obvious that most there would object. There's very few new build properties there at all at the moment, so they can't make up a significant amount of those currently objecting.
Regardless of who is better at filling in forms, there'd be no point in combining the results if the combined results didn't benefit the area as a whole and they obviously would.
Maybe, but whining about it when you're a part of the problem is laughably hypocritical, and there are a reasonable number of houses built over the last few decades.
Being propped up by farming subsidies, or by tax avoidance that amounts to far more than the 'chavs', 'doleys' and 'minimum wagers' are liable to see in a lifetime does seem to make some think they're a cut above. A lot of these villages are really just satellite housing estates that have so few facilities of their own, they'd probably be eligible for a grant to help improve their deprivation score if they came within the boundary.
Hull generally tops the tables for poor school results, obesity, smoking, child pregnancy, all sorts of things. If Hull and the East Riding's (or even just the larger metropolitan area) figures were combined, they wouldn't be anywhere near the top of these lists. That's the point.
But that is like saying things would be improved because of superior East Riding figures. That is the sort of traitorous thought that should be met with a ban from entering the city of culture.
Just watched that video. When was it in the plans to re clad the deep or is this just if we create the cruise terminal? looks decent though.
Not half as pathetic as that reply. I'm not anti East Riding. I lived there for long enough. I'm anti-hypocrites, that whine and whinge about Hull but get all defensive when the reality of their own existence is mentioned.
I guess that's your point. Mine was that stats alone can prove very little without looking beyond them, and considering how they're created. Experience of both shows me ERYC schools ain't necessarily all that much better than Hull.
When in Rome... It seemed only polite to respect the local culture. If I'm honest though, I faked it with the sheep.
