I welcome everyone to the 11th meeting in 2009 of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee. I remind everyone that mobile phones and BlackBerrys should be switched off.
In that case, I advise members that no motions to annul have been lodged and that the Subordinate Legislation Committee determined that it did not need to report SSI 2009/102 to the Parliament.
The second item on our agenda relates to forthcoming business, when the committee will consider the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Bill. Do members agree that the committee should arrange for the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body to pay witness expenses under rule 12.4.2 of standing orders?
Do members have any objection to delegating to me the power to decide on individual claims and the details of any claims for witness travel expenses?
I briefly suspend the meeting to allow witnesses to join us for the next item on our agenda.
The third item on the agenda is stage 2 consideration of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill. I welcome to the meeting the Minister for Children and Early Years, Adam Ingram; Robin McKendrick, head of branch, support for learning division; and Louisa Walls, the principal legal officer.
I hope that I will be able to juggle the many notes that I have made on these amendments.
Before you recap, I should point out that the minister's amendment is actually amendment 8, which inserts a new section 8A. I make that clarification so that others who are following these proceedings are not as confused as I initially was. I just want to ensure that you get your amendment numbers correct.
Apologies, convener. I am bound to confuse you again. When I refer to 8A, I am referring to new section 8A, which is proposed by amendment 8.
First, I should say that I do not know what Ken Macintosh is getting at when he talks about compromise. I do not remember even being consulted, as deputy convener of this committee, on the timing, content or structure of this meeting. Given the talk about democracy at the previous meeting, I think that that is quite appalling.
Before I allow any other member to come in, I should say that I do not think that it is particularly helpful if we talk about the committee's processes when we are supposed to be considering the amendments. I have no desire to limit discussion of how the committee considers the bill, but we can talk about that at the end of this morning's business. I point out that the structure of today's meeting was not something that was agreed by the clerks to the committee or the convener; the Parliamentary Bureau decided that today's meeting should take place in response to the legitimate concerns of a number of MSPs that it was undemocratic that the Parliament would be unable to consider amendments that had been lodged because no financial resolution accompanied the bill.
Yes. I believe that the proposal in amendment 23 would mean that education authorities would become responsible for assessing pupils in private schools, even though those private schools would not be obliged to carry out recommendations arising from an assessment. That would be of no advantage to the child and would be a straightforward waste of public money.
Convener, you said that you do not want to talk about process, but the process is clearly different from what has happened in the past, and I cannot help but think that stumbling along, going with the flow and discussing it at the end of this morning's business might be a topsy-turvy way of approaching things.
Miss Campbell, I have already made it clear that we will return to the process at the end. I have given members leeway to make comments, but I remind you of what I asked members to do and that I made it clear that we would have a full discussion on the process at the end of our consideration of all the amendments. I ask you to speak to amendment 23.
Excuse me, convener. It would have been helpful if you had said that before Mr Macintosh spoke to amendment 23. Everybody would then have operated on a level playing field. Mr Macintosh was allowed to make his remarks, but there has been an attempt to stop us talking in a similar vein. Surely it would have been more consistent to have explained to him that we would discuss the amendments first and then everybody would discuss the process at the end, rather than have one rule for him and apparently another for the rest of us.
I certainly did not cut you off, Mr Gibson; I allowed you to have your say for exactly that reason. Your comments are unhelpful. I have asked all committee members to draw a line under our discussion of the procedures that are being followed, which we will return to at the end of our consideration of agenda item 3. I ask Miss Campbell to speak to amendment 23 if she has any comments to make on it.
I have nothing to say about amendment 23, but I am concerned about why the Presiding Officer deemed that some of the costings are underneath the £300,000 trigger point. I do not know where the Presiding Officer got those figures from or whether we should have had that information in the first place so that we knew what we were comparing things with. We have figures from the Government but no understanding as to why the Presiding Officer ruled the amendments as being adequate for us to discuss today.
The Presiding Officer has taken a decision. He has considered all the information that the Government and individual members provided to him, information that was prepared by SPICe and the advice that officials gave him; he has made a ruling; and he has made it clear that he will not enter into a debate about how he reached his decisions. That is in keeping with the practice of all Presiding Officers in the Parliament when they take positions and make rulings on whether amendments are within the scope of legislation or rulings on costings.
I would like some clarification. Did the Presiding Officer consider the paper that was presented to us at half past 9 this morning in any of his deliberations?
The Presiding Officer has not had sight of the paper that has been given to the committee. I understand that it was provided to officials and that officials used the information in it in preparing their advice to the Presiding Officer. However, he has not seen the paper.
So what did he base his decisions on? I understand what you have said, convener, but if the figures differ widely, it might have been helpful to have had an indication of why the amendments are within the scope of today's discussions.
I am not here to justify the Presiding Officer's decisions. He has taken a decision and made a ruling, which stands.
Miss Campbell, if you are unhappy with that, you should not raise the matter here; it would be for you and your party to take it up with the Presiding Officer at the Parliamentary Bureau. I remind you that the Presiding Officer is under no obligation to advise the Parliament of how he reached his decision or of the information that he used. I have made it clear this morning that a ruling has been made, and the Parliamentary Bureau has been advised of that. Following that decision, we are taking evidence based on it. It is time for us to move on.
I accept what you say, convener, but the fundamental point is that the bill is about the best interests of the children involved with additional support for learning and their parents, families and carers, and that should be paramount in anything that we decide.
I remind members that I clearly asked them to save their comments about the process until the end of our deliberations on specific amendments. I understand and accept that the matter is key to the overall consideration of amendment 23, and I have personal views about the imperfections of the process, but this is not the appropriate point to discuss it on the record. We should have a discussion about it at the end of the meeting; members will have to use their judgment, make their points about their feelings about the financial costings that have been provided—imperfect or otherwise—and point out why they believe that those are flawed in relation to specific amendments as we consider them.
My point is one of clarification. I do not disagree with what you say—we need to get on with our consideration of the amendments—but it is important that committee members' concerns are on the record. I would like clarification that the discussion that you say that we will have on how the situation has come about will be on the record, rather than being an informal discussion among committee members.
I think that we unanimously agree on that. I intend that that discussion will take place on the record—I have no desire for us not to be transparent and open in all our dealings in relation to our consideration of this piece of legislation.
Thank you, convener, and good morning, colleagues—I hope that we are all refreshed after our Easter break. I will preface my remarks in a similar vein to Ken Macintosh. I made it perfectly clear when the bill was introduced that I intended neither to tamper with the ethos of the 2004 act, nor to extend its scope or the associated financial envelope in any significant way.
Thank you, minister. Does Ken Macintosh, or any other member of the committee, need any further clarification from the minister?
I welcome the minister's comments about the regulations on dispute resolution, but I ask for further clarification. If an authority refused to accept a request for an assessment, the matter would go to dispute resolution. I understand that, currently, if a parent disagrees with the choice of person to carry out the assessment, which can be contentious, the issue is covered by the regulations. Will that also be a matter for amendment?
I welcome the minister's assent.
I would like time to consider some of Mr Macintosh's points, but I must say that the 2004 act allows parents many options. For example, they can make a placing request to an independent school. That covers much of Mr Macintosh's point on parental choice in terms of determining in which authority or school they would like their child to be educated. He also made a point on requests for assessment. That is part of the whole process of establishing additional support needs for a child. When the child has been educated in an authority, that assessment is a right.
That is on the private schools. Can I have clarification on the pre-school and home-educated situation?
Again, home education is a choice that parents make. I imagine that, before they make that decision, most parents seek the best possible outcome for their child and go through a process with their authority in terms of assessment and all the rest of it. Mr Macintosh is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Pre-school is a similar situation. Section 5 of the 2004 act covers the scenario that you raised, Mr Macintosh.
You said that you will address the issue in an amendment that we will consider next week. I seek clarification on whether the amendment will give parents of pre-schoolers—children below the age of compulsory schooling—the right to request an assessment.
I will bring in my officials. I ask Robin McKendrick to explain the point.
In terms of the home-educated and children in independent schools, the 2004 act provides that a parent or school manager can request an assessment of additional support needs, for example if those additional support needs would lead to a co-ordinated support plan. Under section 7 of the act, an authority has the power—not a duty, but the power—to make such an assessment. If they believe that a child for whom they are responsible requires a co-ordinated support plan, they must inform the parent and school manager of the provisions that would be in such a plan.
I am fully aware of that; I would not have lodged the amendment otherwise. We debated the issue in 2003 and 2004, and the point of the amendment is to change the power to a duty. You have made your view clear on public schools, private schools and on home education. What is happening with pre-school children? Will you grant pre-school children the right to an assessment and place a duty on local authorities to respond to that?
With respect, Mr Macintosh, that is the subject of amendment 26. Amendment 23 focuses on a different area. We could extend to a general discussion on the bill, or we could focus on amendment 23. As I say, I intend to come forward next week with a comprehensive response on the issue of pre-school children.
I appreciate that there are other amendments that will relate to pre-school children, but Mr Macintosh's amendment, which is being considered today, specifically relates to pre-school children. It would help the committee if you could respond to the specifics of pre-school children in relation to amendment 23, which is being considered today, irrespective of whether there is a further amendment that will be considered at a later date.
I do not really have anything to add to what I have already said with regard to pre-school children and amendment 23.
There is not much point in continuing the line of questioning. I am slightly disappointed, because my question was not a difficult one. Amendment 26 will address some of my concerns, and I think that the committee and the minister were close to agreement on the issue, but as far as I am aware amendment 26 does not extend the right to request an assessment to pre-school children. If the minister thinks differently, he has the opportunity to tell us.
As I said, I need time to reflect and consider that. I am afraid that I cannot make an instant decision on Mr Macintosh's suggestion.
Christina McKelvie seeks further clarification.
I did have a point of clarification. I asked earlier about whether amendment 23 was outside the scope of the bill. Have the clerks done a scoping exercise? If so, can the committee have sight of that? It would allow me to determine whether I can take forward my opinions on amendment 23.
I have ruled on the scope of the bill, based on the legal advice that was provided to me. That decision has been taken, and the amendment is within the scope of the bill.
Can we have sight of that legal advice?
No. That is a decision for the convener of the committee, in accordance with the standing orders of the Parliament.
The purpose of amendment 13 is to repeal the word "significant". As members will know, this important issue was raised by several if not all witnesses during our discussions on the bill. The word has been a barrier, and it is clear that its use has produced a distorted interpretation of the new rights enshrined in the 2004 act.
Although I understand the point that Mr Macintosh is trying to make, I have concerns that extending eligibility for a CSP to every child or young person with enduring complex or multiple additional support needs would put an additional burden on education authorities without providing any real gain to the children themselves. It would be disproportionate for many children and young people who, at the moment, receive support only infrequently—for example, once or twice a year. The draft guidance that has been prepared would cover the issue.
We could approach the matter in different ways. First, we could go down the route that Ken Macintosh suggests and take away the word "significant". Many organisations regard that route positively because of complete and utter frustration at the actions of certain local authorities in their role as gatekeepers to services. If any member doubts that local authorities are not, in certain cases, doing what they are meant to do, they need only look at the financial memorandum, which reflects on the number of CSPs that have been granted compared with those that were estimated in the financial memorandum for the 2004 act.
I invite the minister to comment.
I agree very much with a lot of what Margaret Smith said. Removing the word "significant" from the eligibility criteria effectively removes the discretionary element of deciding whether a co-ordinated support plan should be prepared. That would have a major impact on the ethos of the bill and in financial terms, as Kenny Gibson pointed out.
I want to clarify two separate issues, the first of which is about cost. I was intrigued by the minister's paper on costings, which suggests that removing the word "significant" would automatically mean that around 8,500 pupils would qualify for a CSP. I will not go into the argument about whether that is the case, although I do not mind exploring the issue further. I have a different view about the number who would qualify. I am intrigued to know how many pupils the minister thinks would qualify if the code of practice were used to amend the definition of "significant". Currently, 2,694 pupils have a CSP. The minister suggests that if the primary legislation were amended to remove the word "significant", 8,500 pupils would automatically benefit. If we took the alternative approach of using the code of practice, how many would benefit?
I reiterate that my view—and the Government's view—is that not enough CSPs are being produced up and down the country. The purpose of establishing the CSP working group, of defining the term "significant" appropriately and of reworking the code of practice—the committee should remember that the code will be presented to it and the rest of the country for consultation in due course—is to ensure that all children with additional support needs are appropriately supported. When a CSP is appropriate, we want it to be put in place. As I have suggested, the best way to proceed is through the code of practice, which we hope will change what is happening in practice.
I welcome the minister's comments. The clear difficulty is that the code of practice is not amendable by us, whereas the bill is.
We will issue a draft of the code of practice and we will take on board people's views and amend the draft accordingly before the code of practice is presented to Parliament.
It is worth noting in passing that we cannot discuss an amendment that might or might not cost the sums of money that have been mentioned, but the minister can produce regulations that will cost that money and which are not subject to amendment. That is interesting. The regulations do not require a financial resolution, although it seems that they will cost more than the bill. If the minister expects the code of practice to extend the use of CSPs to exactly the same number of pupils as it is suggested my amendment would cover, introducing the code will cost more than passing the bill. However, I will put that to one side.
I understand that the working group's short term is over and that the group has reported. The consequence is the revision of the code, which I hope that you will see and comment on in due course.
The next amendment that the Presiding Officer has ruled has a significant or potentially cumulative cost is amendment 15, which was lodged by Claire Baker.
Amendment 15 would ensure that parents were provided with a supporter or advocate when necessary and would bring the bill in line with the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000. The amendment arose from concerns that were expressed during stage 1 by witnesses and by committee members from different political parties. It attempts to address the gap between the right to advocacy and the delivery of that right, by placing a duty on local authorities to provide or fund the right to support and independent advocacy.
This is my first stage 2, too. I am a wee bit concerned about amendment 15, although I take on board what Claire Baker said and understand that she is well intentioned. It is unclear from the amendment whether the intention is to provide for either advocacy or support, or both, which has cost implications. I understand that we must base the discussion on the Presiding Officer's determination on costings, but according to the Scottish Government paper similar approaches have cost more than £2 million, which is far more than the £300,000 trigger for a financial resolution. Therefore, amendment 15 should not be part of our consideration of the bill, especially as there appears to be nothing in the 2004 act that would prevent an authority from providing an advocate or supporter.
Amendment 15 is really important. It is also quite difficult to cost. We have heard from organisations that provide support and advocacy that the cost would be considerably less than the Government has suggested, but the Government's suggestion is based on costs for advocacy under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, and there are definitely similarities.
I endorse the comments that Claire Baker and Margaret Smith have made—and indeed the consensual position in the committee's report following our consideration of the matter. Even if the minister is not able to follow the line that amendment 15 suggests, does he agree in principle that there should be a funded advocacy service? If so, what are his thoughts on the form that such a service should take?
It might be helpful to split the issue into two parts. There is the question of advocacy services for parents who are speaking to the local authority about their children's needs and are seeking representation at that level; there is also the question of the advocacy services that are required for representation at tribunals. I will deal with those two matters separately.
We will come to Margaret Smith's amendment in a minute, but I will first allow Claire Baker to respond to the minister's remarks.
Briefly, the minister's response is helpful. All committee members have recognised that the way in which the current legislation operates gives parents a right to advocacy without placing a duty on anyone to deliver that service. That has been a problem—we heard that during stage 1—as has the adversarial nature of the tribunal, which is an issue of concern. I welcome the minister's commitment to fund representative advocacy support services.
Yes. The bidding process should kick off in the autumn, so I hope that we can move seamlessly from the current situation to the new one in the new year.
In addition, the minister mentioned the eight pilot authorities. In evidence at stage 1, I think that Highland Council was mentioned as one of the authorities that uses Parent to Parent. What is being done to encourage other authorities to go down the path of providing that type of service? The purpose of amendment 15 is to impose a duty on education authorities to provide such services. If we are not to go down the road of imposing a duty, how can we encourage authorities to provide such services?
Clearly, a number of local authorities already fund local advocacy services within their areas, but it is really a matter for them to respond to the wide variety of demands for advocacy that exist. Such demands are not just focused on additional support needs. I would certainly like to see advocacy services expand, as I think that there is a need for them. I have asked officials in my department to carry out a mapping exercise of advocacy services in Scotland, so I will want to look at that before I consider any proposals to beef up provision. However, I am broadly supportive of encouraging local authorities to develop advocacy services, as I think that they are important.
On that point, does the minister have any concerns that anecdotal evidence—particularly from Who Cares? Scotland, which provides advocacy services to 31 local authorities—suggests that several authorities have substantially reduced the advocacy services that they offer? One or two local authorities are even considering ending the provision of independent advocacy.
It would be a retrograde step if authorities were to go down that line without considering any alternative.
At stage 1, the minister said that he had commissioned a study into the issue from the Govan Law Centre. I cannot remember exactly, but I thought that he said he would have that paper before or during stage 2—or, certainly, before stage 3—and would share it with us. Is that the case?
Yes; I mentioned that I had commissioned the paper and that I hoped to update the committee on what we intended to do on advocacy services by the time that stage 2 arrived. If I recall, that was what I said. I will need to look it up again, but I assume that I am fulfilling my obligation to come back to the committee at stage 2 with the announcement that I made.
The next group of amendments that the Presiding Officer has ruled have a significant or potentially cumulative cost contains amendments 10 and 19. Elizabeth Smith, who lodged amendment 10, will speak first. Margaret Smith, who lodged amendment 19, will then make her remarks.
What struck me most frequently when we took evidence—particularly from the National Autistic Society, the Scottish Government schools directorate and the Additional Support Needs Tribunals for Scotland—and when I consulted two experts in ASN support, was the contrast between Scotland and other countries when it came to the provision of adequate and accurate information on the rights of parents and their children in assessing good-quality care and support. I was particularly struck by examples from countries where, from the day that a specific additional support need is identified, a clear parent-partnership officer structure was put in place with a mandatory obligation on local authorities to provide a clear set of policies, support and a code of practice, plus a full list of the rights of parents associated with those two provisions.
Amendment 19 says that information about a council's ASL policy should be available on request from each school or education authority establishment, and suggests that the information should be in any school handbook or other publication about the services that the authority provides that is given to parents. It also suggests that the information should be on any website that a school or the local authority maintains. We know from statistics that 24 per cent of adults access information about their local authorities from websites, so at least that percentage is likely to do so in this respect, as well.
We all want to find ways to inform and empower parents. That has been a theme in many of our discussions on the bill. However, amendment 10 would require education authorities to provide parents of children who have additional support needs with all the information that they published under section 26 of the 2004 act, whether or not parents wanted that information. The Scottish Government's figures indicate that the information might have to go to between 38,000 and 136,000 parents and young people. If we take the higher figure and assume that it costs £2 to send information out to a person, we are getting near to the £300,000 trigger for a financial resolution. Moreover, amendment 10 does not set out how information should be distributed. The Scottish Government has suggested that costs could be high and might range from £250,000 to £870,000 or so. There would be postage costs, too.
As was the case for my colleagues, the inclusion of amendments 10 and 19 in the Presiding Officer's list caused me the most surprise. I do not understand why it is thought that they would attract significant costs.
I point out that amendments 10 and 19 are deemed to incur not "significant" but "cumulative" costs. The committee will be able to consider the amendments next week and, indeed, agree to them, if we think that they are appropriate.
I have no argument with the policy intention of amendments 10 and 19. As Aileen Campbell intimated, my concern relates to the unintended consequences of how the amendments have been drafted, which means that they will place a particular kind of burden on local authorities. I have produced alternative amendments that I would like to share with the members who lodged amendments 10 and 19, so I would like to discuss the amendments with them prior to 12 noon on Friday, which is the deadline for lodging stage 2 amendments.
I am happy to have such discussions with the minister. The important point is to ensure that information is made available at locations and in ways that enable parents and local people to access it as easily as possible. It is clearly not our intention that school handbooks should be full of ASL information. However, it is perfectly reasonable to require that every school handbook in the country should include some ASL information, to act as a signpost for parents. I am happy to have a conversation with the minister about that prior to Friday's deadline.
I, too, will discuss the matter with the minister. My amendments have been costed on the basis that information will be provided not to all parents but to parents who have children with ASL needs, which may alter the conversation slightly. I am willing to share with the minister the costs of doing that, which I do not see as being significant. We can discuss the matter.
That concludes our consideration of amendments 10 and 19. I suspend the meeting for a short comfort break.
I reconvene this meeting of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee. We return to item 3 on our agenda.
Time and again we have heard that the 2004 legislation is good in principle, but that the practice does not always match the spirit of the legislation or the intent of Parliament in passing it.
The spirit of amendment 25 is good, but it is lacking somewhat on the details. The provision to which Margaret Smith referred, about local authorities consulting people whom they consider to be appropriate, drives a bit of a coach and horses through the amendment. I am also alarmed by the possibility that the cost could range from £96,000 to £9.6 million. An amendment with a possible financial impact of such a wide range cannot possibly be accepted. The proposal will have to be considered again, if that is possible. The phrase that adheres to the proposed consultations under the amendment is, "How long is a piece of string?" A further issue is that, even if there was a duty to consult, there would be no corresponding duty on the Scottish ministers to publish guidance.
Sorry, convener. I wanted to add another point, but I forgot about it.
I remind you that I chair the meeting and I decide who is going to speak. I will let you in on this occasion.
I have workings, but I decided not to go into them.
I lend my support to the principle behind amendment 25, as it is yet another amendment that could improve the process by which we help parents through the difficulties of having children with additional support needs. The key priority is to place a duty on local authorities to assess whether they are delivering good-quality services. That ought to happen as part of local authority processes in any case, but a duty is important.
I ask the minister to respond to members' points.
Members have covered the ground. We see amendment 25 placing an onerous cost burden on local authorities—members have the methodology that brought us to that conclusion—although I agree with the policy intention. We need to establish best practice for consulting parents on the information that they require with regard to their children's needs, and we must ensure that that best practice is adopted throughout the country. When I write to chief officers, I shall refer to that point. I hope that that satisfies Margaret Smith's aims.
Margaret Smith, do you have any further points of clarification that you would like to pursue with the minister?
I shall address some of the points that have been raised on my amendment 25. I share a certain amount of common ground with Kenny Gibson—that may not happen on many occasions today. My amendment 25 seeks to pick up on HMIE's concerns about consultation, and concerns that were raised with the committee. When one drafts and lodges an amendment, it is concerning that the costings are so varied. SPICe effectively rowed back on the most excessive costing when I clarified that the duty placed on councils was discretionary—they would not have a duty to consult every single person.
Technically, that issue could probably be swept up at stage 3, if I was allowed to do so, but I will not be.
Minister, do you have anything to add?
I look forward to exchanging views with Margaret Smith and seeing what we can come up with.
We now move on to amendment 16, which the Presiding Officer has also ruled would have a "significant" or "potentially cumulative" cost. I invite Margaret Smith, who lodged the amendment, to speak first.
I will give the committee my rationale for lodging amendment 16 and address others' interpretation of it, which are not the same thing. My motivation when I spoke almost in support of the point that Aileen Campbell made at the start of the meeting is exemplified in relation to amendment 16.
Of course I hear what Margaret Smith says, and I understand where she is coming from, but my reading of the information that we have received today is that there are concerns that amendment 16 would run contrary to all other education legislation by removing the cap at the age of 18. As Margaret Smith said, we would all want to guard against a huge cost of £14 million.
I, too, was surprised that very modest amendment 16 was included in the category of amendments involving a significant cost.
The major problem is that 18 is the cut-off point between childhood and adulthood—that runs throughout our education legislation. My understanding of amendment 16 is that it aims to ensure that children or parents of young people have access to a tribunal if they have problems with the transition planning that relates to the move from children's services to adult services. I certainly want to address such issues, but we have a problem with legal definitions and issues such as who is entitled to school education. The proposals would upset the whole system, so we must consider that.
I am happy to undertake discussions with the minister on amendment 16 and the other two amendments that we discussed earlier. If there is a way in which we can address the matter that does not involve hitting the definition of a young person, that would be the best way forward, but I have been in the hands of draftsmen who have suggested that that cannot be done and have said how the matter had to be addressed.
There is only one other thing that I want to mention, which follows on from what I have said. We recognise that problems exist. HMIE pointed out that there were problems with post-school transitions. We have appointed a national transitions development officer, who will lead, manage and co-ordinate local and national partnership approaches to the effective implementation of the act. It is not as if we are not aware of the issue or that we are not taking steps to address it. Members of the committee should bear that in mind. Not all solutions are necessarily legislatively or policy driven. The example in question is an example of that.
That concludes our consideration of amendment 16.
Amendment 12 was lodged to address further the issue that was raised in amendment 16 and to ensure that, through the tribunal process, measures will be put in place if a local authority fails to fulfil properly the duty to ensure that transitions are in place for young people who are beyond the school leaving age and have been identified as having additional support needs. I stress that we are talking about situations in which a local authority fails to fulfil its duty.
There are already dispute mechanisms in the 2004 act that relate to post-school transitions, but I agree that we must do all that we can to ensure that they work. Under the act, if a parent of a child with additional support needs feels that transition arrangements are necessary and the authority disagrees, the parent can refer the case to dispute resolution, and if the child has a CSP the case can go to a tribunal. We have heard about the problems in relation to that, so we must ensure that the process is clear and works as well as it can.
I refer to my response on amendment 16, when I spoke about the appointment of a national transitions development officer, which would also help to reduce the incidence of authorities' failure to comply with their duties on post-school transitions. The whole point of appointing such an officer is to address those issues. The post will be, if you like, a preventive mechanism, to prevent such failure from happening.
Will you clarify the cost of that appointment?
I would still like to know what the cost will be.
I do not have the information to hand, but I can certainly furnish you with the detail later.
That would be helpful; thank you.
That concludes our consideration of amendment 12. I will now suspend the meeting to allow the minister and his officials to leave. Thank you, minister, for your attendance today.
I said earlier that I would give members an opportunity to express any concerns that they might have about the process, before we conclude our consideration of agenda item 3. I intend to allow every member to speak once—and once only—if they so wish, to conclude our consideration of the matter. I remind everyone that we are still in public session and that the official report is present.
We all said at the start of the process of looking at the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill that it was potentially one of the most important bills to go through Parliament because it is extremely important that we deliver adequate and better services for those affected. It is important that this Parliament lives up to its promise of being open and transparent and that it is able to deliver good-quality legislation. I firmly believe that, to do that, we have a right to access to all relevant information, both of an objective nature, which has been the case, and of a subjective nature—in other words, when objective information has been used subjectively by any party, the Government or officials to put forward a point of view.
I agree absolutely that the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee must consider the issue. We are in a unique set of circumstances. Obviously, issues to do with financial resolutions have cropped up in previous sessions of Parliament but, on those occasions, the Government produced new financial resolutions. I accept that the present circumstances are different, because we have a minority Government rather than a majority one, but the standing orders say that it is up to the Government to produce a financial resolution.
Does any other member wish to speak?
Everyone wants to be the last person to speak because of your ruling that we can speak only once, convener. Perhaps members should be allowed to speak more than once.
All members have been frustrated today because we have been faced by two problems. The first is the process and the second is a far more political issue, which is the deliberate decision by the Scottish Government not to publish a financial resolution. That is a rare event that has provoked all the problems today.
I agree with some of the comments that have been made around the table about our frustration with the process. This is the first time I have taken part in stage 2, and I have found it to be extremely frustrating and, in some cases, quite opaque. I did not lodge amendments because of a lack of information and support. From other members' comments and from my experience of trying to gather the evidence that would allow me to decide whether I could or could not support an amendment, it is clear that information and support were lacking. On numerous occasions, I sought clarification from the clerks and SPICe, but did not receive it in time or in a form that I found supportive. It makes me extremely disappointed that, by design, default or even by the rule of unintended consequences—which we have discussed today—some of the amendments have resulted in wrecking the bill, which has a direct impact on parents and children who need its support.
We were told about the scope of the bill at the outset and we were told that there would be no financial resolution. Ken Macintosh seems to be suggesting that there has been a sudden change of mind on the part of the Government, but that is not the case: the position was clear from the outset.
I agree with what many members have said. This has been a difficult process for someone who has been experiencing stage 2 for the first time. When amendments were lodged there was a lack of information about the process, the status of amendments and how to provide costings.
I will clarify the procedures that have led to our ending up in this situation. On whether stage 2 amendments are ruled admissible or inadmissible, I make it clear that that is a decision for the convener at stage 2. At stage 3, it is the decision of the Presiding Officer.


text:
Great Tension As Buhari's Top Minister Faces Sack, Over $17 Million Reckless Spending
By Post-Nigeria: May 15, 2019 15:24
Revealed: Why Senate ratified new Service Chiefs behind closed doors 0 04.Aug
BREAKING: STOP NOW!!! President Buhari Gives Powerful Marching Order To All His 2019 Presidential Supporters Nationwide 0 28.Jul
El-Rufai Technically Announces The End Of Tinubu's Political Career, Ahead Of 2023 0 06.May
Some Civil Society Organisations, have called on President Muhammadu Buhari, to find a replacement for Abubakar Malami, the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, and Minister of Justice, over the payment of $17 million to Lawyers he engaged for the repatriation of $321 million Abacha loot.
Enrich Monfrini, a Swiss Lawyer, hired by the Federal Government since 1999, for the recovery of the loot, has already completed the job, and has been paid his fee.
In a series of interviews, Monfrini insisted that there was no need for the AGF to engage new Lawyers.
Rather than write directly to the Swiss authorities, to seek the transfer of the funds to Nigeria, Malami, however, engaged Oladipo Okpeseyi, and Tope Adebayo, for the purpose, and despite the outcry, the Lawyers were eventually paid secretly.
At a Press Conference in Abuja, on Wednesday, the Coalition said that the President who promised to fight corruption, is losing the momentum.
"We recall the shady deal involving the Minister, which led to the approval for payment of a highly controversial and contentious payment of $17 million, to two Lawyers, for an already concluded deal on the repatriation of the Abacha loot, from the Swiss Bank", Ezenwa Nwagwu, the Convener of the Say No Campaign, who spoke on behalf of the Coalition, said.
"One of the greatest disappointments in the fight against corruption under this administration, has come from the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Minister of Justice, whose actions and inactions have continued to bring shame to the proclaimed anti-corruption campaign of the administration, and huge losses to Nigeria.
"Statutory provisions make the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, pivotal to the fight against corruption, charging its occupant with the sole responsibility to deliver justice, in PUBLIC INTEREST, in its actions, inactions, and decisions. This is as contained in sections 174 (1) (2) and (3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended.
"Sadly, Nigerians recall many shady and odious roles the current Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, has played to deliberately frustrate the fight against corruption, the last three years."
The group listed the AGF's alleged role in the "fraudulent" reinstatement of Abdulrasheed Maina, the former Chairman of the Pension Task Force, into the Civil Service.
Malami was also said to have been fingered in an attempt to frustrate the investigation and prosecution of the Director-General of the Nigeria Broadcasting Commission, NBC, for his "involvement in the diversion" of about N2.5 billion.
He was also accused of superintending over a "systematic strategy of frustrating the Freedom of Information, FoI, Law, as government Agencies have found cover and a new boldness to ignore and treat with impunity, the many FOI requests, in order to frustrate any accountability effort by concerned public".
In its recommendations, the Coalition said that as Buhari prepares for swearing-in and commencement of his second term, on May 29, he should "immediately relieve and replace the current Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Malami, in order to salvage the fight against corruption, and recover public confidence and support for the fight against corruption."
The Civil Society Organisations, also want the President to reconfigure his fight against corruption, by ensuring people with questionable characters are not appointed to sensitive positions, capable of curtailing the independence of key anti-corruption Agencies, and the fight against corruption.
The Coalition includes: SAY NO CAMPAIGN, YES Project, YIAGA AFRICA, African Centre for Media and Information Literacy, AFRICMIL, The Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, CISLAC, Cable Foundation, Action Aid Nigeria, and Lawyers Network Against Corruption, LAWNAC.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Semi rolls over at Lake Cable and Sego, causing minor injuries
The News staff
Two California men suffered minor injuries early Wednesday morning when the semi they were in rolled over on its side in the area of Lake Cable Road and Sego Road in Reno County.
According to Reno County Sheriff's Department Deputy M. Bohringer, at about 2:35 a.m., deputies were dispatched to the scene, where they found a 2017 Freightliner semi rolled over onto its passenger side and completely blocking both lanes of traffic on Sego Road. The trailer portion had disconnected from the tractor and continued south of where the tractor came to rest. The trailer also overturned onto its passenger side and spilled the loaded contents into the ditch.
Ali Ghulam Allahyari, 43, Poway, California, said he was driving south on Sego Road and for an unknown reason left the roadway to the right. The trailer slid down into the west ditch. Allahyari attempted to get the trailer corrected and back on the roadway when the momentum continued to pull the tractor farther into the ditch, causing them both to roll over onto the passenger sides. Allahyari complained of neck and back pain.
Muntazir Mehdi, 52, San Diego, was asleep in the back of the tractor during the accident. Mehdi also complained of neck and back pain. Both Allahyari and Mehdi were taken by Reno County EMS to Hutchinson Regional Medical Center.
D&D Towing was contacted to respond to the scene to set the tractor and trailer upright. This morning, Sego Road was back open to one lane of traffic while the towing crews continued the cleanup process.


text:
Presnoy is een gemeente in het Franse departement Loiret (regio Centre-Val de Loire) en telt 164 inwoners (1999). De plaats maakt deel uit van het arrondissement Montargis.

Geografie
De oppervlakte van Presnoy bedraagt 7,6 km², de bevolkingsdichtheid is 21,6 inwoners per km².

Demografie
Onderstaande figuur toont het verloop van het inwonertal (bron: INSEE-tellingen).

Externe links

Gemeente in Loiret

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


You can take away a pizza but you can't take away the quality and value of Les Jacobins.
Today I turn my attention to pizza. The French love it. The English love it. It seems that everyone in the world has some kind of pizza format. The Italian pizza seems to have found its familiar form when tomatoes arrived in Europe in the 16th Century thanks to the Spanish colonisation of the Americas.This means that the Roman Empire rose and fell without ketchup. It also means that "Bloody Mary" queen of England 1553 - 1558 could never have added juice to her vodka. (She also would not have had any vodka because no potatoes had arrived from the Americas). Writing/researching a blog makes up for my complete lack of historical education.
If I go out for a pizza I'm looking for a big hit. I want flavour and savour. Like everyone I have used the pizza chain main street places. I've always found them clean and adequate but never special. Recently I went to the French town of Saint-Jean d'Angely to dine with friends. This was not my first time at Les Jacobins. At my last visit the place was at least fifty percent full of English diners. The menu has a large choice of beautifully cooked pizzas, the normal range of Italian dishes, salads and a very generous steak and fries option. There is a decent choice of wine by bottle, pichet, carafe or glass. There are desserts and everything you could ask for to make a wonderful convivial evening.
I had the 30cm Clermentoise pizza and Oscar downed the Charentaise. The cost of each unit was about £8 - $13. The entire meal with wine, desserts and coffee was about £50 -$79 for three persons! However, we did not eat there just for the price. The service is great and friendly. The ambiance is welcoming with a real independently run family feel. It sure ain't any kinda chain joint. There is an outdoor terrace for warm summer evenings. If you are holidaying in the Charente-Maritime region and fancy a take-out meal this is the place to come. The staff speak English if needed.
Les Jacobins is situated in the heart of the Saint-Jean d'Angely, close to the ninth century Royal Abbey. The town centre has a medieval authenticity and is worth a visit in itself. So - Les Jacobins receive an Emma's five star Spare Tyre Tummy Award for value and excellence. Great job guys.


Sumptuous villa 5 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms with private pool on a large plot of 1500m² in a residential area of Pinar de Campoverde.
The property has been completely renovated in 2015 and tastefully decorated. It has an 8 x 4 m swimming pool with a sun terrace, there is also a large parking space and a covered parking for two cars under the Villa.
Access to the villa is via a small staircase. Upon entering you have the hallway to your left which distributes 4 bedrooms, 3 doubles and a single with two bunk beds. In addition to the bedrooms, there is the family bathroom and the master bedroom has an en suite bathroom.
Just in front of you are 3 steps leading to the main part of the house, a large kitchen / diner and a living room with a pellet fireplace.
The kitchen has been well thought out and has a large bar. From the bay window, you have access to beautiful covered terrace ideal for barbecue with the family. There is also access to the separate bedroom with en-suite bathroom, which also benefits from its own solarium. The main solarium is accessed by separate steps and offers an unobstructed view towards the sea.
The Villa also benefits from a large storage room.
Do not wait to come and discover this magnificent villa.


text:
REPORT: Phoenix VA continues to struggle with long wait times for medical care
By: Nohelani Graf
Just as President-elect Donald Trump makes his nomination for Secretary of Veteran's Affairs, a new federal report not only validates deeper problems with Phoenix veteran's care in 2015 — but it also shows the problems are ongoing today.
According to the Office of Special Council, on an average day 1,100 veterans are waiting longer than 30 days to see a doctor. Psychotherapy patients wait an average of 37 days -- and that's an improvement from a 75-day wait in 2015.
The report also revealed that 59 veterans whose appointments were canceled last year never rescheduled them and dozens of them could be suffering serious health problems as a result. For instance, one man with cardiovascular disease did die — it could've been prevented.
Their recommendations are:
Make sure all staff are trained with new directives developed last fall.
Review any areas of noncompliance.
Provide interim therapy to necessary patients.
However, VA administrators said all of that is being done.
The OSC report, which has been sent to the White House and Congress, comes from allegations made by whistleblower Kuauhtemoc Rodriguez who is the chief of the VA's Specialty Care Clinics in Phoenix.
Not all of his claims were substantiated, and some of his numbers were found to be inaccurate by investigators. However, the basis of several of his allegations were found to be true, and he said no one should be celebrating just because the numbers weren't as bad as he thought.
"These are people's fathers, their uncles, their brothers and they're dying and it's not right," Rodriguez said.
He claims his computer at work has been investigated, he's been harassed by superiors and passed up for promotions — all since speaking out.
"I wasn't willing to let my fellow veterans suffer like that. I made a stance and in a sense, I've ruined my career," he said.
On Thursday, he'll face an Administrative Investigations Board over allegations of harassment against him.
The VA is adamant one has nothing to do with the other and no individual is being investigated. Rodriguez is part of a leadership group called into question.
"Bogus, the people that are supposedly accusing me are the people who, for the last year, have been harassing me," he said.
Read the Phoenix VA email statement below:
"In regard to a whistleblower being interviewed during this process, protecting whistleblowers is a priority for VA. The PVAHCS leadership respects the role and purpose of whistleblowers, and values the information they provide as opportunities to improve the organization. The whistleblower protection act of 1989 prohibits reprisal, and the current PVAHCS leadership will not allow any whistleblower to be retaliated against. There are no current administrative or disciplinary actions based on the OSC report or any disclosures associated with it."


Ah, interactive fiction. Easily my second favorite kind (get it?). Seriously though, choose-your-own-adventure style stories are, generally speaking, an amazing thing. Oh and one of the most popular tools for making them just got a sizeable new release. Ain't a Twine 1.0 update/patch either, as so much has changed, this one's more like… a sequel.
What I mean by that last bit is that unfortunately, aspiring writers with stories written in the original Twine won't be able to simply 'import' them into this one. According to its creator, this is due to the simple fact that "its markup and syntax is not backwards-compatible". A shame, but not like there's any reason to port a finished project – or at least, I don't think there is. I'd say start writing a new one instead, and enjoy all the new toys Twine 2.0 brings instead.
Now, since I haven't had time to take it for a spin yet, I'm gonna stick to the facts for the time being. First up is the much requested addition of Linux support, along with… wait for it… tablets! Heck, seeing how it's a browser-based application, anything capable of running modern browsers should be useable with it. Darn thing even works on my aging Galaxy S Advance (Android) phone, even if it's obviously less than efficient for the actual writing aspect. Oh and as was the case with Twine, its successor is also both free and open source.


Wow — it's been FOUR MONTHS since my last blog here. THE REASON: (can you guess?)… It's been a very, very busy summer! While many people are busy working a job (or 2, or 3), and many others are really busy looking for one — the rest of us are keeping busy doing BOTH! I'm one of the latter — working constantly — juggling several projects at once and creating more work. Keeping busy is not hard in the field of the arts. Making a living at it is another story. If you want to be a professional in this "business," it takes more than getting up and going to work (and then going home at the end of the day).
One of the most important things we can do as artists and "business-persons in the arts" is to keep growing, learning, re-learning, investing in ourselves, and in our tools of the trade.
Since it has become more difficult to make a living in any field these days (working longer hours for less pay!), it would help to know some of the things we can do to "diversify our portfolios of assets" — something every artist can do — and I would love to elaborate in the next article on this subject. I'll also open the door to the FOM vault, and we'll look at some things from the Facts Of Music® vantage point, and you'll begin to see why those who have seen it are better for it!
I started out as a guitar player who was very interested in most other instruments, could sing some, and also dabbled with arranging and composing. Little did I know back then (in the 60's and beyond into the 1980's) that I would someday have to use all those "skills" and add several more to boot.
Two blogs back (only May 15th, 2010…) — seems like forever ago — I mentioned that I was going to release some time-treasured secrets from the FOM vault. What did this mean?
I am going to start posting some of the materials that make it much easier for most of us to absorb large masses of musical knowledge in a way that is much more organized and therefore easier to master (some of this information is often referred to as "Music Theory" — although this truly is a "misnomer," and you will soon see what I mean). I am also planning to post Facts Of Music® PDFs and video sessions to pull things together for you, at least in a basic way, hoping that all of this will motivate and encourage you in more ways than one.
Almost two years ago, I started doing live Skype web-cam sessions with students, and these have become valuable ways to work with people anywhere in the world (it also helps that I can communicate these things in languages other than English!).
When we get back together in the next month or so in the next blog, I will introduce the first of many subjects and show you HOW and WHY the "Facts Of Music®" approach is the faster, better and richer way to really put things all together for yourself in music and this crazy world we call "Show Biz." It's going to be another busy time now with the holiday season just around the corner (again?!!!) — so you can consider and anticipate this as a "Christmas gift" from Facts Of Music®! Hopefully it will be an "early one," if I can pull the resources together and get it out to you.
Until then, keep on plugging and stay focused and organized wherever possible, and keep learning and enjoying NEW THINGS — musically and otherwise.


We all rode kick scooters when we were kids. They are fun to ride and also very effective as a short distance commuter.
But hey, if you want a kick scooter now, you can definitely have one. They are eco-friendly, compact, and easy to ride. But there are a lot of kick scooters available in the market for adults now.
So just for your ease, we have chosen ten of the best kick scooters which are good for an adult to ride on. Without further ado, let's check out what we have for you in our list.
Micro's scooter for adults is a premium priced commute you can get in the market. But this scooter is worth every penny.
The overall build quality and design are outstanding. The body of this scooter is made with aluminum. So the frame is very strong and light. The scooter weighs 10 lbs but can withstand a rider of up to 220 lbs.
This adult kick scooter gives a very comfortable ride thanks to its heavy wheels that have a thick layer of soft, high-rebound urethane. These wheels are 200 mm in diameter and they are perfect even for a hard and rough surface like concrete. The Micro Black also uses standard 8 mm bearings which also makes the ride smooth. You can also replace these bearings very easily with a higher quality one if you want.
The handlebar is adjustable with a range from 72 cm to maximum 103 cm. This makes it suitable to ride for a rider of any height. The handlebar is also 360 degrees rotatable. So if you want to pull some stunts while roaming on it around your neighborhood, then you are in luck.
The bike is also a compact one and folds very conveniently. So if you want to carry it around while not riding it, you would not be in trouble. Also, all the parts of this bike are replaceable, so if any part needs to be replaced, it can be done very easily.
The scooter is also available in two colors, white and black. Whatever color you choose, you will get one with a nicely done paint job.
This scooter has a very simple and classic design.
The maximum weight limit on this scooter is 220 pound.
It folds down easily for convenient storage.
This scooter is equipped with 200 mm polyurethane wheels on both rear and front.
The handlebar is adjustable within a range of 26 inches to 38 inches from the deck.
Aeroactive is another name in the premium list of adult kick scooter. There is no compromise on the build. This kick scooter has an aluminum frame and the deck is also made of aluminum. But the lower portion of the deck has some plastic. It is a mid-weight scooter weighing almost 13.5 lbs. A rider weighing up to 220 lbs can ride it without worrying anything.
The T-bar is adjustable like most of the kick scooters. It has three levels of height adjustment, 41 inches being the maximum height and 37 inches the minimum.
The wheels are PU wheels with 200 mm diameter. PU wheels are strong and very smooth to ride. These wheels perform flawlessly on rigid surfaces like concrete and also on gravel surfaces to give a smooth riding experience. To provide extra comfort, there are suspensions attached to both front and rear. Aeroactive also used ABEC 7 carbon steel bearing which is excellent in giving a smooth performance.
To stop the scooter, a step-on rear wheel friction brake is in place.
The folding mechanism of this scooter is also very unique and effective. The entire T-bar is three-step adjustable, one position for riding the scooter, another for parking it (there is no kickstand as it does not need one) and the last step is to fold the scooter. After folding, the scooter is compact enough to adjust into any place. There is also a carrying strap attached to it which makes it very easy to carry around.
There is also a bottle holder attached to the T-bar.
The frame and deck are made of solid aluminium. It is lightweight weighing 13.5 lbs.
Aeroactive scooter has dual suspension. Both, front and rear suspension, give a very comfortable smooth ride.
The 8 inch wheels make the ride more comfortable and these wheels are ideal for larger glides. The large wheels are much better for a smoother and safer ride, plus they limit the risk of going over the bar.
This scooter is easy to fold, carry and transport. The carrying strap makes it even easier to carry around.
The adjustable height of the T-bar also makes it perfect for rider of all heights. The height can be adjusted from 37 inches to 41 inches.
This is a bicycle without a seat and pedals – that was my first reaction to this scooter. Schwinn is a bicycle manufacturing company and they started making kick scooter for an adult with this unique bicycle style.
The Schwinn Adult Shuffle Scooter is a large hybrid push scooter, reminiscent of kick bikes in Europe. The effortless design is very nice and "bicycle-like" handlebars that offer greater control over regular handlebars.
This scooter has bicycle style wheels. Both the rear and the front wheels are spoke wheels, just like a bicycle. The front wheel is 26 inches in diameter and the rear wheel is 16 inches. For comparison, traditional mountain bike small wheels are 26 inches in diameter. Both the tires of this scooter need to be inflated like a bicycle.
The frame is made of solid steel which makes it a really heavy scooter to roam around. The weight of this scooter is 25 lbs but it is designed to make it easy to handle. The deck is made of wood and really nice to look at.
This scooter is almost 6 feet in length, so this is not something which is small and compact. This scooter is perfect for work out.
Nice bicycle style design makes it look really nice.
The large and wide handles make the handling very easy and comfortable.
The wheels are big and spoked and give a smooth ride.
The brakes of this scooter are rubber pressure brakes. Both the front and rear wheel has brakes and this scooter can be easily stopped by pulling any of the two brakes on the handle.
This kick scooter comes from Germany. Hudora is a well known German company which makes short commute devices. Their products are known for superior quality.
Hudora made no compromise in the quality of this scooter. The body frame is made of high-density aluminum alloy. Even the footboard is made of metal. No part of this scooter is made of cheap plastic or other low-quality material except the mudguard which is plastic made. The metal makes it a very strong scooter. It weighs only 11 lbs but it can take a rider weighing up to 264 lbs.
The T-bar of this scooter has five adjustable heights. This makes it versatile and comfortable for a rider of any height. Both the handles have a very nice grip with rubber cushion around them.
This scooter also has big wheels. They are 8.1 inches in diameter, are comfortable to ride and ease the handling. There is a friction brake on the rear wheel. This brake is very effective and needs to be stepped on.
The scooter can be folded very easily from the hinge attaching the T-bar and the deck. There is a strap attached to the T-bar which comes very handy while carrying the scooter around when not riding.
This scooter is made of high density durable aluminum alloy. The body is very strong and rigid.
Hudora Big Wheel Scooter weighs around 11 lbs and the max rider weight it can take is around 264lb. It's a safe and comfortable for both adult and growing teenagers.
All the Hudora products pass the German GS safety certification. This ensures the high quality of their products.
The height of the T-bar of Hudora Big Wheel Scooter is adjustable. The maximum height of the handlebar is 42 inches and the minimum is 32.7 inches.
This scooter has two large wheels 8.1 inches in diameter. These PU wheels and very good in performance on all types of surfaces.
Hudora's scooter is easily foldable and very convenient to carry around.
Fuzion Cityglide is a nice and affordable kick scooter.
This scooter has an aluminum made body frame and deck. This made it very strong and rigid. The weight of this scooter is only 9.9 lbs and is considered to be a very light one.
The metal made telescopic handlebar of this scooter is very strong. The height of this handlebar is also adjustable so that rider with any height can ride it. This height ranges from 29 inches to a maximum of only 36 inches. So if the rider is more than 6 feet, it will be very hard for him to ride this scooter.
Wheels of this scooter are big. Both the rear and front wheels are 210 mm in diameter and these are PU wheels. PU wheels are low resistance and very smooth to ride. Also the bigger the wheels, the less effort it will take to speed up. Fuzion also used ABEC 7 bearings in these wheels for good performance.
To stop the scooter, there is a friction brake attached to the rear wheel. You just need to put your foot on it and press. This brake works fine and stops the scooter immediately.
To carry the scooter conveniently while not riding on it, you can fold it up. Though Fuzion Cityglide's folding mechanism is not so smooth and it might take some effort to fold it.
This scooter is also available in three different color options.
The dimension of this scooter is 35 x 4.5 x 33.6 inches.
The frame and deck are made of aluminum so it is very light and strong.
The weight of this scooter is 9.9 lbs and the maximum rider weight is around 220 lbs.
Fuizon Cityglide has wheels of diameter 210 mm. These are PU wheels and very good in performance.
This scooter has a step-on friction brake attached to the rear wheel.
The telescopic handlebar is adjustable in height with a range from 29 inches to 36 inches.
This scooter is foldable and easy to carry around.
Ancheer kick scooter is a very nice and affordable one to buy. For that price, they are offering a very good quality scooter.
The chassis and the deck are made of aluminum alloy. Overall the scooter is strong enough for an average adult to ride on it. The maximum rider weight it can take is around 220 lbs, but we recommend a rider weighing below 180 lbs should ride this scooter. The scooter is also very lightweight and weighing around 13 lbs.
The telescopic bar of this scooter is very strong and rigid. Its height can be adjusted and it has four levels of height adjustment. The minimum height is around 35 inches which is fair enough even for a teenager and the maximum height is 39 inches which make it a good ride for a tall person as well.
This scooter has 195 mm wheels on both rear and front. These are PU wheels and are very smooth and quiet to ride. The big wheels also reduce vibration. For an extra smooth ride, this scooter has shock-absorbing suspensions attached to the telescopic bar and also to the rear wheel. These suspensions boost the riding comfort.
For safety, this scooter has a reflective tail light.
This scooter is very compact and easily foldable. Once folded, it can fit very easily inside the car's boot or anywhere in the corner. This is very easy to carry along.
This scooter has an aluminum made frame and deck.
It is very lightweight scooter and weighs around 12 lbs.
The height of the telescopic bar of this scooter can be adjusted as per the rider's need. The maximum height of this bar is 39 inches and the minimum height is 35 inches. This makes it good for both tall and short person.
This scooter has 195 mm big PU wheels. This wheels give a smooth and comfortable ride.
The scooter has spring suspension attached to both front and rear.
It also has a reflective tail light for safety.
This is the second scooter from the German manufacturer Hudora in our list. First one was a premium scooter but this scooter has an affordable price range yet there is no compromise in the quality.
When it comes to the building quality, Hudora offers the best. The frame, as well as the deck, are made of very high-quality aluminum. The metal body is very strong and can hold a rider of up to 220 lbs. But at the same time, this scooter is very lightweight weighing only 8.8 lbs.
The telescopic handlebar has four adjustment levels. The minimum height is 31.5 inches and the maximum height is 40.9 inches. This wide variation in height makes this scooter suitable for a tall adult and also for a child in his/her early teens.
This scooter has extra-large wheels. The diameter of both the front and rear wheels are 205 mm and both are urethane wheels. They are very smooth and make the ride very comfortable. This scooter can run smoothly in plain surface and also in a hard concrete surface.
To carry the scooter around while not riding, it can be folded very easily. This also has a carrying strap attached to the telescopic bar. This scooter is very compact after folding and can be placed in any corner.
The frame of this scooter is made of aircraft-grade aluminum. The reinforced metal deck is very strong and can hold riders up to 220 lbs.
It is equipped with extra-large 205 mm urethane wheels. These wheels are very smooth to ride even on rough surfaces.
It has very good and soft hand grips on both the handles.
This scooter is easily foldable and weights only 8.8 lbs. This makes it light enough to carry around when not riding on it. It also has a shoulder strap to make a convenient carry and storage anywhere.
This is another scooter from Fuzion. B200 is an upgrade to the previous Fuzion Cityglide and has some new features.
Just like Fuzion Cityglide, B200 also has an aluminum frame. The deck is also metal made and looks pretty strong and rigid. The scooter weighs only 9.9 lbs. It is strong enough to withstand a rider weighing 220 lbs.
It has 200 mm PU wheels for better performance. These are very smooth while riding.
The height adjustable T-bar also makes this scooter suitable for everyone to ride. The minimum height being 29 inches, this scooter can easily be ridden by a child. But the maximum height of the handlebar is only 36 inches. So if your height is over 6 feet, you should consider buying another scooter.
This scooter has a hand pulled brake. This brake is attached to the rear wheel and stops the scooter effortlessly.
It is also easily foldable and available in two color variants.
The frame and deck is made of aluminum. So it is very light and strong.
The weight is 9.9 lbs and the maximum rider weight is around 220 lbs.
Fuizon Cityglide has wheels of diameter 200 mm. These are PU wheels and very good in performance.
Cityglide has a hand-pulled friction brake attached to the rear wheel.
Razor A5 is a very popular kick scooter for adults. Razor became a very old and trusted brand in the commuting device market, not only has made no compromise in making this scooter but also kept the price very reasonable.
Razor targeted this scooter to everyone, from an eight-year-old child to a full grown adult.
The frame and deck are aluminum made and strong enough for a rider weighing around 180 lbs. Though Razor claims it to be fine for and rider weighing 220 lbs, we do not recommend this scooter to a heavyweight rider.
The handlebar height can be adjusted to three different levels. This scooter has Razor signature rear fender brake for safety.
Wheels of A5 Lux are urethane wheels. So they are good in performance and make the ride comfortable.
If you want to buy Razor A5 Lux, you get an option of two different colors to choose from.
Razor A5 Lux has aluminum made frame and deck. This makes the scooter strong and rigid.
The scooter has two large urethane wheels. These wheels provide a smooth and comfortable ride.
The height of the T-bar can be adjusted to three levels. This makes the scoter good for everyone.
This scooter is very lightweight and weighs only 8.5 lbs.
A5 Lux is easily foldable and can be carried very easily.
The last kick scooter in our list is the most affordable one available in the market for adults. The price-tag is maintained in the lower segment.
The body is made with aluminum alloy. This allows the scooter to be very lightweight yet strong. It weighs around 8 lbs. This makes it decent for an average built person but not good for a muscular and heavy person.
Both the rear and front wheels are 200 mm PU wheels. These wheels are very smooth to ride and also perform well on rough surfaces. To stop the scooter, a step-on brake is there attached to the rear wheel.
The height of the handlebar is adjustable to four height levels. This makes the scooter suitable for the people of all heights including kids. The minimum height of the handlebar is 78 cm while the maximum is 93 cm.
The deck is also long enough for an average guy. The length of the deck is 15 inches. The total length of the scooter is 35 inches.
The scooter can be folded very easily. So you do not have to worry about it as it fits easily into the car's boot space.
Though Ancheer advertised the scooter for all adults, we do not recommend this to be used by any well-built adult. This scooter should be used by a rider who weighs less than 100 lbs which make it perfect for growing teens.
This scooter has adjustable handlebar with 4 levels of height adjustment. The maximum height is 93 cm and the minimum is 78 cm.
This scooter is equipped with super smooth and high durability 200mm PU wheels on both rear and front. They are both smooth and quiet. High quality bearings are attached to these wheels which reduce vibration and make a smoother ride.
The scooter is made of aluminum alloy and weighs 8 lbs.
If you are an adult and want to buy a kick scooter for your short distance commute, do not just go to the market or Amazon.com and buy one blindly. Instead, consider some of these things before buying.
Height. Yes, you must consider not only the height of the handlebar of the scooter but your height too. Consider your height first and then see the adjustable heights of the handlebar. If the height of the handlebar suits your height, then go for it.
Weight. Here you should consider your weight, not the scooters. Before buying, check if the scooter is strong enough to take your weight.
Wheels. You should definitely check the kind of wheels and also the diameter of them. Large wheels are good for a smooth and fast ride. Also, a good quality wheel will give you much more comfortable ride than a low quality once.
Compactness. If you want a kick scooter for you day to day use, you should definitely check if it is foldable and how easily you can carry it. You do not want a bulky scooter which you cannot even fold and have to drag wherever you go.
Well, it is time when I tell you about my favorite scooter and the one which I want to buy myself.
Based on all my needs and considering my mid-weight athletic body type, I will go for AeroActive's scooter. The scooter is very strong and compact. Apart from all its features, I personally liked its unique design a lot.


text:
Q: jQuery setting checkbox state after preventing default action I have a checkbox that needs to change state, but without invoking parent's click event. So, I created this:
$("#divTabBody@(Model.TabNumber) tr input[type='checkbox']").on('click', function(e) {
    e.preventDefault();
    e.stopPropagation();
    if($(this).is(':checked'))
        $(this).prop('checked', false);
    else
        $(this).prop('checked', true);
});

Parent's click is not execcuting, so that's good, but the checkbox is not changing state. Why?

A: You should just use e.stopPropagation() to stop parent's click event. Nothing else needed.
$("#divTabBody@(Model.TabNumber) tr input[type='checkbox']").on('click', function(e) {
    e.stopPropagation();
});

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Erigeron taipeiensis is a Chinese species of flowering plant in the family Asteraceae. It grows in subalpine meadows in the Taibai Mountains Shaanxi province.

Erigeron taipeiensis is a perennial, clumping-forming herb up to 35 cm (14 inches) tall. Its flower heads have lilac ray florets surrounding yellow disc florets.

References

taipeiensis
Flora of Shaanxi
Plants described in 1973


Hunter Litigation Chambers is a nineteen lawyer litigation boutique in Vancouver. The observe of the firm is restricted to dispute resolution, with an emphasis on industrial litigation and arbitration, class actions, labour and employment, prison and regulatory, and constitutional and administrative regulation.
Litigation attorneys often conduct an preliminary case investigation to determine, within the plaintiff's case, if enough proof exists to file a lawsuit or, within the defendant's case, what proof exists to defend a possible suit. The investigation course of may include finding witnesses, taking witness statements, gathering paperwork, interviewing the client and investigating the info leading to the dispute. Work is driven by procedural rules and the timetable of the courts. Good litigators perceive how greatest to manoeuvre within the system whereas additionally developing successful case strategies.
Litigation attorneys draft a variety of pleadings and motions on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant. Plaintiff attorneys will draft a summons and complaint to start the lawsuit. Defense attorneys collaborate with the consumer to investigate the allegations of the lawsuit and formulate responses. In 2016, a lawsuit towards New Zealand-owned CBL Insurance Ltd generated headlines by winning a A$5 million damages payout, none of which went 300 laid-off factory employees. Litigation funder LCM Finance received A$1.85 million whereas lawyers, liquidators and auditors split the remaining. Only in 2006, with the tip of the extended litigation and a reach of a financial settlement, had been the works resumed within the frozen part of the project. Finally, and critically, you should be replacing the cases that settle or otherwise end with new work.
Attorney-General George Brandis, who in opposition mentioned higher regulation of litigation funding needs to be considered, declined to remark. That is an actual focus for us; in case you get bright, motivated individuals in the fitting place within the staff you're half option to a profitable business. Scrimping on the time spent on people points never pays in the long term. The phenomenal amount of paperwork generated implies that young litigators spend a lot of their time sifting through paperwork, scheduling and copying them in order to present the courtroom and all other events with an agreed bundle of evidence.
On the bigger instances, it's important to sit again and work out the place you wish to be – or don't want to be – in six or eight weeks' time and then work backwards from there to evaluate what the crew needs to be doing at present (or should have been doing yesterday). Second, as a accomplice, you might be far more concerned in discussions about recruitment and case resourcing. Those points are on the coronary heart of a profitable business. The judge agreed, despite objections from the Rennert defendants and Jefferies. She authorised the sale to Gerchen Keller in late August.


text:
VeriSign Names New CEO
Monday, May 28, 2007 Financial
VeriSign named William A. Roper, Jr. as its new President and Chief Executive Officer, replacing Stratton Sclavos, who is leaving after 12 years at the post. Roper, who has served as a Director of VeriSign since November 2003, most recently served as Executive Vice President of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). He also served as SAIC's Chief Financial Officer from 1990 to 2000, and played a leadership role in Network Solutions from the time of its acquisition by SAIC in 1995 until its merger into VeriSign in 2000.
The company's Board also elected Edward A. Mueller as Chairman of the Board.
http://www.verisign.com
Alcatel-Lucent Supplies IP/MPLS to Chile's Telefónica del Sur
Monday, May 28, 2007 Chile, Packet Systems
Telefónica del Sur, the leading telecommunications company in the south of Chile, selected Alcatel-Lucent to supply a converged IP/MPLS network that will deliver high quality data and Internet services to business and residential customers. Alcatel-Lucent will install the 7750 Service Router for the backbone network. Network management will be handled by the Alcatel-Lucent 5620 Service Aware Manager, which automates tasks while supporting the introduction and administration of new services. Service launch is slated for early in Q4.
http://www.alcatel-lucent.com
Windstream to Acquire CT Communications, Adding Lines in Rural U.S.
Monday, May 28, 2007 Mergers and Acquisitions, Service Providers
Windstream agreed to acquire all of the outstanding shares of CT Communications (NASDAQ: CTCI), in a deal valued at $585 million ($31.50 per share in cash, which represents a 31 percent premium to CT Communications' previous 30-day trading average). Windstream intends to finance the acquisition with debt and existing cash.
Windstream provides voice, broadband and entertainment services to customers in 16 states. It serves approximately 3.2 million access lines and has about $3.2 billion in annual revenues.
The acquisition of CT Communications will add approximately 158,000 access lines and 29,000 broadband customers. CT Communications serves residential and business customers located primarily in North Carolina. The deal will nearly double Windstream's presence in North Carolina.
http://www.windstream.com
In July 2006, Alltel completed the spin off its wireline business, which was merged with VALOR Communications Group to create Windstream, a major wireline operator focused on the rural U.S. market.
Windstream is based in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Optibase/UTStarcom Supply IPTV with AKSH in India
Monday, May 28, 2007 TTP
UTStarcom will integrate Optibase's advanced H.264 Media Gateway (MGW) 5100 IPTV encoding platforms in its end-to-end RollingStream IPTV solution for deployment with AKSH in India. Aksh Optifibre Limited (AOL) is the second largest company in the Indian Optical Fibre cable industry. The company has entered into a seven-year agreement with MTNL to provide IPTV (Broadband content) services in Delhi and Mumbai.
Aksh plans to use Optibase's integrated carrier-grade TV streaming platforms in order to provide advanced H.264 high-quality encoding.
http://www.optibase.com
http://www.utstar.com
Broadcom Prevails in Patenet Dispute with QUALCOMM
Monday, May 28, 2007 Broadcom, Silicon
A federal jury ruled that certain QUALCOMM cellular baseband chips and software infringe claims of three Broadcom patents, and awarded Broadcom $19.64 million in damages for Qualcomm's past infringement. Because the violation was found to be willful, the court may increase the damages up to three times the amount awarded by the jury.
Broadcom said the three patents include:
U.S. Patent No. 5,657,317, which relates generally to simultaneous participation on two networks using a single transceiver. The jury found that Qualcomm has used the multimode inventions of the '317 patent in its EV-DO baseband chips.
U.S. Patent No. 6,847,686, which relates generally to a chip architecture for performing video processing. The jury found that Qualcomm has used Broadcom's patented architecture for providing increased video performance in its "Enhanced Multimedia" and Convergence" chip platforms.
U.S. Patent No. 6,389,010, which relates generally to a phone that may be used to place calls over fixed or variable bandwidth networks. A 'push-to-talk' feature on a cell phone gives the user the choice of making a 'walkie-talkie' type connection instead of a traditional cell
phone call. The jury found that Qualcomm uses the invention of the '010 patent in its QChat software.
In a press release, QUALCOMM said it plans to challenge the jury's findings of infringement, validity and willfulness in post-trial motions and on appeal, if necessary.
http://www.broadcom.com
http://www.qualcomm.com
T-Mobile Invests in JAJAH for Mobile VoIP Calling
Monday, May 28, 2007 Service Providers
T-Online Venture Fund - the investment arm of Deutsche Telekom - has joined JAJAH's US$20 million Series C investment.
JAJAH offers a Mobile Suite application that enables consumers to make free long-distance and global calls directly from their mobile phones. To use the service, you first need a JAJAH account, which is free and without obligation.
The process is simple: callers type in their own number (landline or mobile) at http://www.jajah.com/ , and insert their desired destination number. JAJAH then rings both parties on their actual phones. The company says its JAJAH Mobile Suite will allow virtually any mobile phone to make JAJAH calls easily.
T-Mobile is already in the process of embedding JAJAH into its own web properties and expects to offer consumer and business solutions based on JAJAH technology in the future.
"The communication landscape is rapidly evolving," said Andreas Kindt, Chairman of the Investment Committee of T-Online Venture Fund and Member of T-Com Management Board for IT. "By investing in companies like JAJAH, we will be able to continue to bring users around the world the innovative solutions they are looking for."http://www.jajah.com
In May 2007, JAJAH, a start-up based in Mountain View, California, announced $20 million in Series C funding for its mobile calling service. Intel Capital was the lead investor (amount undisclosed) in the round. Additionally, a business agreement was made with Intel Corporation that includes business and marketing components. Intel will provide JAJAH access to their extensive community of product dealers, OEM customers and developers, to further their reach into global development communities.
JAJAH was founded in 2005, and has offices in Mountain View, Calif., Tel Aviv and Luxembourg.
Zohar Zisapel Expands his Stake in RADCOM
Mr. Zohar Zisapel, who serves as Chairman of RADCOM, has expanded his stake in the company by acquiring 263,300 RADCOM shares during the current month through purchases on the open market. As a result, Mr. Zisapel now holds 3,626,342 RADCOM shares, representing 22.2 % of the company's issued share capital. He is the company's largest shareholder.
http://www.radcom.com
Cisco Completes Acquisition of WebEx
Cisco Systems completed its acquisition of WebEx Communications, a leading provider of on-demand collaboration applications and services.
Cisco said the deal extends its vision for Unified Communications, particularly within the small to medium business (SMB) segment.
Cisco also said that it plans to preserve WebEx's subscription-based services strategy and business model going forward.
The deal was valued at $3.2 billion (in cash) when it was first announced in March 2007.
http://www.cisco.com
WebEx was founded in 1995 and held its Initial Public Offering (IPO) in July 2000. The company has close to 2200 employees. For FY2006, which ended December 31, 2006, WebEx reported revenues of $380 million.
OpVista Rebrands Optical Gear, Avoiding Trademark Dispute
Monday, May 28, 2007 Optical
OpVista is renaming its recently-launched "AnyWave" family of optical networking products to "nWave." The company said it is making this move to proactively avoid any potential dispute with Vanu's use of the "AnyWave" terminology.
OpVista' nWave Optical Networking platform is universally compatible with existing metro and regional DWDM systems and fiber plant. The nWave product family can quadruple the number of available wavelengths and enables carriers to deliver bandwidth in single wavelength increments to any node at any time.
http://www.opvista.com
Tundra Collaborates with Ericsson on MicroTCA Ecosystem
Monday, May 28, 2007 Silicon
Tundra Semiconductor is working with Ericsson to license the Switching Module of a MicroTCA Carrier Hub (MCH) card, designed by Ericsson, with Tundra's Tsi578 Serial RapidIO Switch. The license granted to Tundra includes sub-licensing rights and Tundra will be sub-licensing the design as the Tsi578 MicroTCA Switching Module (MSM), thereby broadening the availability of Serial RapidIO-based MicroTCA Systems.
http://www.tundra.com
MobiTV Hires DreamWorks Exec as CFO
Monday, May 28, 2007 Start-ups
MobiTV announced the appointment of Bill Losch as the Company's chief financial officer (CFO). Losch joins MobiTV from DreamWorks Animation SKG, where he managed all accounting and control, financial reporting, treasury, and tax functions as the company's chief accounting officer (CAO). He was part of the management team that completed a successful initial public offering in October 2004. Prior to DreamWorks Animation Losch was at Yahoo!, where he served as vice president of Finance and CAO.
MobiTV claims more than two million subscribers worldwide for its mobile content service.
http://www.mobitv.com
China's Heilongjiang Mobile Selects Nokia Siemens Networks for GSM
Monday, May 28, 2007 BroadbandWireless
China's Heilongjiang Mobile Communications Company (Heilongjiang MCC) selected Nokia Siemens Networks to provide GSM Base Stations and Base Station Controllers as part of a network expansion project. The delivery has already started and the network will be commercial in June. Nokia Siemens Networks will also provide professional services including network implementation, planning, managed service, training and maintenance services. Financial terms were not disclosed.
Nokia Siemens Networks noted that it has largest installed base of equipment in China Mobile's GSM network.
http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/global
JDSU Closes Picolight Acquisition -- VCSELs
JDSU completed its acquisition of Picolight, a leading designer and manufacturer of optical pluggable transceivers.
JDSU said the deal strengthens its position in high-growth pluggable optics for the enterprise market and adds an established, vertically integrated manufacturing model.
Picolight has been a pioneer in developing the vertical cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL), a key technology used in high-speed and short-to-medium distance optical interconnects. The company has shipped over 1 million small form-factor pluggable products. The product line includes 850 nanometer (nm) and 1310 nm VCSEL-based transceivers. JDSU said the acquisition supports its growth and margin expansion initiatives with a best-in-class vertically integrated manufacturinghttp://www.jdsu.com
JDSU first announced plans to acquire Picolight in February 2007 in a transaction valued at approximately $115 million in JDSU stock, plus up to an additional $10 million in cash subject to the achievement of certain revenue targets during 2007.
The term "VCSEL" was coined in 1989 by optical innovator and Picolight Founder/Chief Technology Officer Jack Jewell. VCSELs emit light vertically through the surface of a wafer—rather than through its edges, as with edge-emitting lasers. Picolight VCSELs are semiconductor lasers in which the active region on-chip is embedded between mirror layers on a semiconductor wafer.
Spirent Announces US Delisting & Deregistration
Spirent Communications will delist its American Depositary Shares ("ADS") from the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE") and to deregister from the US Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). The company said the average daily trading volume of shares represented by its ADS is very
small, accounting for 0.5% of the total number of Spirent Ordinary shares traded in the most recent 12 month period. In light of this level of trading activity and the recent adoption of new rules by the SEC regarding the termination of reporting obligations under US securities laws, Spirent believes that the administrative burden and increasing costs associated with maintaining its listing on the NYSE and the reporting requirements necessary for its registration with the SEC under the US Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("the Exchange Act") outweigh the benefits to Spirent and its shareholders.
http://www.spirent.com
Japan's FamilyMart Convenience Stores Accept DoCoMo Mobile Credit
Sunday, May 27, 2007 BroadbandWireless
FamilyMart, which operates approximately 7,000 convenience stores across Japan, and NTT DoCoMo formed a strategic alliance through a capital tie-up in which DoCoMo will acquire 2,930,500 shares of common stock (approximately 3% of the retailer).
From July 10, FamilyMart convenience stores nationwide will begin accepting mobile credit via DoCoMo's iD platform, thereby enabling users to make payments simply by waving their phones over a reader/writer. Currently, the iD platform is accepted in about 140 FamilyMart stores in Tokyo, Nagoya and Fukuoka cities.
Initially, FamilyMart will upgrade reader/writers at FamilyMart payment counters for compatibility with DoCoMo's ToruCa information-capture service, thereby enabling customers to download coupons and useful information into their DoCoMo phones. In addition, Osaifu-Keitai compatible reader/writers will be installed in "Famiport" multimedia terminals in all FamilyMart stores. These services will become available by the end of May 2008.
http://www.ntt.co.jphttp://www.family.co.jp
Norway's Largest Power Company Chooses PacketFront for FTTH
Sunday, May 27, 2007 Last Mile
Norway's largest power utility company, Hafslund, selected PacketFront to build an open access FTTH network in Østlandet, the area in and around Oslo. The network will be open access and thus open to all service providers who wish to offer services through it. In the first stage, Hafslund will offer IPTV and other broadband services to selected cooperative housing areas in Oslo. PacketFront's partner, NetNordic, will be responsible for the integration of Hafslund's FTTH network. In addition, Datametrix will be responsible for the installation of the core network.
PacketFront described the project as one of the most important contracts in the Norwegian telecom sector. Financial terms were not disclosed.
http://www.packetfront.com
http://www.hafslund.no
ATEME Supplies Encoders for NHK's "Super Hi-vision" Project
Sunday, May 27, 2007 TTP
ATEME's encoding technology was selected for use in the first public Ultra HD demonstration with MPEG-4 AVC (H.264) by NHK in Tokyo.
NHK's prototype Super Hi-vision (Ultrahigh-Definition Wide-Screen System) technology uses a video format with 7680 x 4320 pixels (16 times higher than standard Hi-vision, NHK's HDTV system). Super-fast cameras capture data at a rate of 4,000 frames per second and the audio component is 22.2 (as compared to today's 5.1 surround sound). A full specification for Ultra HD is expected by 2009, satellite transmission tests are predicted in 2011, and by 2020, NHK hopes that Ultra HD will be ready for broadcast to households.
ATEME said 18 minutes of uncompressed Ultra HD footage consumes 3.5 terabytes of data and one minute of uncompressed footage consumes 194 gigabytes. The use of ATEME's MPEG-4 AVC compression technology significantly reduces these requirements.
http://www.nhklabs.com
http://www.ateme.comIn November, NHK demonstrated live-relay DWDM transmission of Super Hi-Vision between Kamogawa of Chiba prefecture and NHK Science & Technical Research Laboratories.
Telstra Tests 40 Gbps Optical Transmission with Ericsson
Thursday, May 24, 2007 Optical
Ericsson and Telstra completed a live network trial of 40 Gbps optical transmission technology. The trial was conducted over Telstra's existing 10Gbps 1,121 km coastal and 1,244 km inland optical fiber routes from Sydney to Melbourne.
Ericsson said its DWDM solution, Marconi MHL 3000, provides a seamless in service upgrade of capacity with minimal investment. The 40Gbps optical transmission technology is based on a new modulation format which exhibits high robustness against PMD (Polarization Mode Dispersion - a fiber characteristic which can limit high-speed transmission).
http://www.ericsson.com
http://www.telstra.com
Alcatel-Lucent to Supply 802.16e-2005 WiMAX for Primus Canada
Thursday, May 24, 2007 BroadbandWireless
Primus Telecommunications Canada, the largest alternative communications carrier in Canada, and Mipps, a Canadian wireless operator that acquired 3.5 GHz licensed spectrum in most major cities across Canada, have selected Alcatel-Lucent's Evolium WiMAX solution to support market trials of IEEE 802.16e-2005 WiMAX broadband wireless access service.
Specifically, Mipps will deploy the Alcatel-Lucent 9100 Evolium WiMAX end-to-end radio solution, including base stations, Wireless Access Controller and Operation and Maintenance Center. Upon successful completion of the field trial, Primus Canada, through its strategic relationship with Mipps, will provide its subscribers with broadband access to high speed Internet and data transmissions with a guaranteed level of quality.
Alcatel-Lucent noted that more than 40 operators worldwide are deploying its WiMAX equipment.


The annual Victoria's Secret Fashion Show was held in NYC last night (you can catch it on CBS December 4), and we were lucky enough to snoop around backstage while the gorgeous gals got dressed. Wanna see?
I also got some one-on-one time with Hilary Rhoda, who walked in the show for the first time ever last night. I've been crushing on her eyebrows for years now, so I had to ask who does them for her. "Me!" she said. "They just kind of grow exactly like this, so I pluck a stray here or there but that's it." Oh, supermodels.
Oh, and in case you were wondering...there were tons of carbs backstage, and I even saw a few models eating them!
Will you gals tune in to the Victoria's Secret fashion show on 12/4? Discuss!
Check out this year's fantasy bra!