Author: AmandaManning

Halifax News | Halifax, Nova Scotia, Enter, Charges, Break, Morning … 0

Halifax News | Halifax, Nova Scotia, Enter, Charges, Break, Morning …

Monday, Nov.

9, 2015 (Halifax, NS) The Halifax Regional Municipality is advising residents of the following service levels in effect on Remembrance Day, Wednesday, Nov.

11: Solid Waste Collection and Facility Hours: No municipal solid waste collection services will take place on Remembrance Day, Nov.


Curbside collection of garbage, organics or recyclables normally scheduled for Wednesday, Nov.

11, will occur instead on the following Saturday, Nov.

Cameron and Miliband trade insults over leadership 0

Cameron and Miliband trade insults over leadership

Ed Miliband said Cameron had effectively been called a loser this week by Nick Boles, a Tory planning minister, who said many people do not trust the Conservatives enough to vote for them. Photograph: PA A former Labour 1 minister sparked a series of vicious insults during prime minister’s questions after David Cameron 2 read out one of his tweets suggesting Ed Miliband 3 did not look like a future leader in waiting. Tony McNulty, a former MP and minister, tweeted 4 that Miliband appeared to be indulging in “partisan Westminster Village knockabout” and claimed the public were “desperate for a PM in waiting who speaks for them”.

This was seized on by aides to Cameron who passed him a note while he was at the despatch box, allowing him to taunt Miliband with the criticism within minutes of it being posted. As the leaders continued to exchange verbal blows, McNulty hit back online 5 , claiming it was weak and vacuous of Cameron to read out his tweets in the chamber when he was meant be engaged in serious debate. Miliband had a raft of insults of his own, as he said Cameron had effectively been called a loser 6 this week by Nick Boles, a Tory planning minister, who claimed many people did not trust the Conservatives 7 enough to vote for them. “What you have shown comprehensively today is you have no answers on the cost of living crisis facing families up and down the country,” the Labour leader said. “That is the truth and your close friend Boles is right.

He says this: ‘There are many people who do not like the Tory party and don’t trust their motives.’ “And he says the prime minister is not the man to reach them. What he is really saying is this prime minister is a loser.” Cameron responded with an attack about Paul Flowers, the former Co-op Bank chairman accused of buying drugs and financial incompetence, who helped approved loans to Labour, and a message sent by one of Miliband’s economic advisers suggesting Ed Balls was a “nightmare”. “You can’t even ask about banking because you’re mired in your own banking scandal,” he said. “What we’ve learned in the last fortnight is you are too weak to stand up to your paymasters in the trade unions, too weak to stand up to your bankers and too weak to stand up to shadow chancellor Ed Balls. “We all know it would be a nightmare and that’s why we are dedicated to making sure the British people don’t have to live through it.” The tit-for-tat continued as Miliband accused the Conservatives of double standards over political donations. “Let’s talk about the people you associate with,” he said. “You’ve taken nearly 5m from Michael Spencer, whose company was found to be rigging Libor rates. You’ve got a party chairman who operated a company under a false name and was investigated for fraud. “You’ve taken millions from tax exiles and tax avoiders, your party has never paid back the money from Asil Nadir and they’re just the people I can talk about in this House.

Now, didn’t Boles have it right yesterday when he said this: ‘The single biggest problem facing the Conservative Party is being seen as the party of the rich’?” The most serious questions of the exchange concerned what Labour said was Cameron’s failure to protect children’s centres 8 . Miliband said the prime minister had signed a petition to save one in his own Witney constituency. “They are going round saying children’s centres are safe and there is no threat to them,” Miliband said. “But things are so bad you have even signed a petition in your own area to save your local children’s centre. Now can you clarify is the petition addressed to your local Tory council or are you taking it right to the top?” Cameron claimed only 1% of Sure Start children’s centres had closed, and said more people were using them than ever. “The figures are, because you don’t want to give the figures, there are 3,000 children’s centres,” he said. “And the point I will make is this: this government could hold its head up high because we’re actually increasing the money that is going to local councils for children’s centres.

That is what is happening under this government.” References ^ More from the Guardian on Labour ( ^ More from the Guardian on David Cameron ( ^ More from the Guardian on Ed Miliband ( ^ tweeted ( ^ McNulty hit back online ( ^ effectively been called a loser ( ^ More from the Guardian on Conservatives ( ^ Cameron’s failure to protect children’s centres (

Holdouts, free riders, and property rights: Part 1, It's my business … 0

Holdouts, free riders, and property rights: Part 1, It's my business …

By: David A. Smith 1 All of us hate being played for suckers, even more when we know it will work, as revealed in this article from the New York Times (September 5, 2013), tempers can run high: 2 Surf City, NJ. Anchor Produce Market 3 sells homemade mozzarella, its own fresh salsa and what many regulars swear is the best sweet corn on Long Beach Island.

Want to buy some? Sign the easement But, a sign on the counter declares, it will not sell anything to the owners of 63 Long Beach Boulevard, 7 Coast Avenue, 12 Sea View Drive South or 34 other nearby oceanfront properties. The stretch of towns affected by Sandy Those owners have refused to grant easements to allow the federal government to build a massive dune along a 50-mile stretch of the Jersey Shore.

Without the protective ridge of sand, engineers predict it is only a matter of time before homes, neighborhoods, even entire communities are wiped out by rising seas Note tacit presumption of global warming, when in fact this has nothing to do with climate change Ed. a reality brought into stark relief by the devastation from Hurricane Sandy. Over the last half-century, an ever-richer world has built ever-larger and more elaborate homes and cities in low -lying coastal areas prone to sea surges 4 , whether caused by Hurricane Katrina 5 or merely by a superstorm.

Some owners think the pristine views are so valuable and desirable and they are magnificent they re worth risking their home for: Ken Burkhardt, a Long Beach Township resident who has refused to give an easement 6 , said, It s my business whether I sign it or not.. It s my business whether I sign it or not. There s the crux.

Is it? The answer is far from clear, though most people in the argument think it is. Do you feel safe?

1. What are the equities here? People love living near water, both for its use (swimming, boating) and even more so for its vistas and yet, the more we build adjacent to water, the greater the disaster risk to cities and the built environment 7 .

Moreover, by the time a natural disaster barrels our way, it s basically too late to save the private property only preventive infrastructure can reduce that risk. Hence homeowners who choose to live in low-lying areas 8 need mandatory flood insurance 9 if they intend to mortgage or sell their houses. Eventually, the installed base of homeowners demands group protection, in the form of levees or breakwaters.

What happens when some of the levees fail The Gloucester breakwater But these work, obviously, only if they cover the shoreline continuously, and while a breakwater can be built in public property (offshore waters), a beach dune will intrude on private property. A contentious stretch of Long Beach Boulevard, with white lines denoting private property Yet there is a clear and present danger: The corps had completed some dunes before Sandy hit, but stopped when they could not get enough easements . Where there were dunes, the storm left relatively minor damage.

Where there were not, homes even many seemingly safely inland were destroyed. There s also the problem of common-benefit: In some areas, homes with dunes were damaged because of gaps left by neighbors without them . In Surf City, for example, the corps had built dunes along all but two blocks of oceanfront, where six homeowners would not grant easements.

The storm surge flooded the neighborhood. (Could the dune-acceding neighbors sue the dune-blocking neighbors for damages? It s an intriguing case that I would not like to defend if I were the holdout property owner.) I d sure like to sue somebody over this In general, a property owner can own a stretch of beach, even if that ownership allows the public to walk the beach; owners can have private title to all land above the normal tide s high-water mark (basically, where the tan sand stops in the above photo). If the dunes are to be raised, the new sand will be on private owners property, and it will impact their ocean views.

The Army Corps of Engineers has built high dunes in much of Surf City, N.J., but resistance from some homeowners has left a section with limited protection from storm surges. Even worse than the free-rider problem is the missing-link problem a wall is largely useless if it has a gap big enough to flood a tidal wave through. Give us a gap and we ll scour a bay The dune project, part of a $1 billion project to protect the state s shoreline Funded, we note, with Federal money: has been discussed for more than a decade, and would build or raise existing dunes to 22 feet, and add about 200 feet of beach between homes and the ocean.

The Army Corps of Engineers 10 would maintain the dunes , but the land would remain the property of the individual owners. As the residents of Long Beach are gaining risk-mitigation infrastructure at no cost to them, in purely economic-expectation terms, their property will be more valuable after the dunes than before but will that compensate them for their change of scenery? These views belong to us property owners, not you drivers-by In the fight about Malibu beach access 11 , some of the same people who want an uncluttered beach view for themselves build houses that block the beach views from everyone even fifty feet landward of them.

Something about beaches drives people nuts 12 , doesn t it? Beaches being linear, sinuous rills of border between water and land, they are infinitely accessible along their length, but inaccessible from landward unless they cross a bit of property that often belongs to a private owner. You can see the beach, you just can t reach it 13 2.

What moves the observant herd 14 to agree to collective defense? Mike Nichols, the owner of Anchor Produce, considers himself super lucky because the storm last October washed four feet of sand into his home in nearby North Beach but did not destroy it. People under-rate low-probability catastrophic until they have a narrow escape, when suddenly they get religion: Sandy prompted many homeowners to drop their opposition to the dunes.

People came down to look at their houses after the storm and said, Where do we sign? Peter Hartney, a councilman in Surf City, said. Where do we sign?

More striking, though, was how many people still refused. The communitarian Times gives short shrift to the holdouts objections, so allow me to list what might be plausible legitimate reasons against the easement: Continued tomorrow in Part 2. References ^ David A.

Smith ( ^ New York Times (September 5, 2013), tempers can run high: ( ^ Anchor Produce Market ( ^ -lying coastal areas prone to sea surges ( ^ caused by Hurricane Katrina ( ^ who has refused to give an easement ( ^ the greater the disaster risk to cities and the built environment ( ^ low-lying areas ( ^ mandatory flood insurance ( ^ Army Corps of Engineers ( ^ Malibu beach access ( ^ Something about beaches drives people nuts ( ^ you just can t reach it ( ^ the observant herd (