El Presidente

Monkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As soon as the private schools break up, Townley > Road and Dulwich Village junctions are absolutely > fine. > > It?s Alleyn?s and Jags causing the problem. They > should sort it and certainly not be looking to > expand. > > Why don?t they convert their expansive grounds > into a car park for the use of all their > customers? Precisely. The whole of ED is going to be put at major inconvenience/increased risk because of two expensive fee paying schools and the pattern of behaviour their parents exhibit. But protesting will make no difference. Southwark never consult meaningfully. They consult to say they have consulted then crack on with what they have already decided they will do. This will be no different.

This will do a fantastic job of pushing the problem somewhere else. Even better it pushes the problem away from an expensive fee paying school towards a free, state school used by local residents. Makes perfect sense.

Have had the same fraud attempted on my card. Blocked by bank. Use both of the shops you mention regularly too.

A casino

macutd Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > any chance of seeing you walking on the local > streets? Yes much better to have them walking around the streets making us feel better, rather doing boring stuff like trying to solve crimes.

a totally moronic post. Speak to the bakery if you care that much. Otherwise stop stirring trouble.

Great proposals from Horniman. Thanks for flagging dbboy. I will be expressing my support in the consultation and encouraging others to do so.

sillywoman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > El Presidente Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I've been patrolling Tesco with my nunchukas > > recently and no one has nicked anything. > Problem > > solved. > > Could you please patrol the Tesco in Herne Hill? > My son works there and has twice in the last 6 > months been beaten up - requiring A&E & stitches - > for attempting to apprehend shoplifters (he's not > the security guard by the way). He has an > overdeveloped sense of right & wrong & insists > that he will not stop trying to stop the thieves. > I live in fear that one of these days, one of the > shoplifters he tackles will have a knife or a gun. > You and your Nunchukas could make that a little > less likely.. > > (I know you were adding some levity to this rather > depressing thread El P, and I'm not serious of > course about your help) > > But, I did want to raise the reality of the > dangers these people pose to the shop workers. > Maybe the OP didn't use PC terminology but she was > coming from the right place by posting to raise > awareness, and maybe to let the scum-bags know > that they are being watched - that just because > they walked away doesn't mean there will be no > consequences to their crime. With Police resources > and manpower at a low, we the community need to > step up in our vigilance and willingness to step > in to help when weaker members are being attacked > or crimes are committed in front of us. Whether > it's by filming on our phones to help the police, > paying close attention so you can give police a > good description, following at a safe distance > when they walk away to help police find them, or > actually stepping in to help physically if you > feel able. Our world is becoming more lawless, our > elected representatives don't seem to care much > because mostly they appear to live in the rarefied > atmosphere of a different world order, so > communities need to get used to taking on more > responsibility for policing ourselves and doing > more to help ourselves to keep our communities > safe. Worried that if I leave there will be a mass raid so will get my mate Brian to pop over. He's crap with nunchuks but is an expert shuriken practitioner so will be fine.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > London Mayor Sadiq Khan promised a fares freeze > during the 2016 London elections. So to reduce > costs to pay for this election promise bus > frequencies were cut last summer. Now bus routes > are being cut, merged and re routed. > Effectively the majority in London unwittingly > voted for these cuts. Quite right. Khan gets lots of positive national headlines because Trump doesn't like him, but the reality is things are getting worse transport wise in ED. This is a massive reduction in local service. And of course our local Labour councillors simply rolled over. Not a scintilla of fight or exercising influence. Party loyalty over loyalty to the area they are supposed to represent.

I've been patrolling Tesco with my nunchukas recently and no one has nicked anything. Problem solved.

What we need is a committee of EDF regulars to approve any new business application and consider it in light of culinary and social diversity. This will ensure an efficient market and bring an end to all these silly entrepreneurs with their fancy ideas of competing with other businesses and meeting unmet demand. Long live the Committee.

If only more East Dulwich men carried nunchukas and swords and stuff they could stop groups of boys stealing bottles from Tesco. Instead all these pussies do is get on with their lives and leave it to the police.

its happening next month

Love mini-golf.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You do all understand, I hope, that the objective > of this exercise is to flood the area with > 'concerns' about e.g. road safety to help justify > ('public demand') whatever draconian and probably > inappropriate 'traffic management' schemes they > plan - more CPZs; more extended double yellows, > less parking etc. etc. There will be no more > buses, with no additional frequency (of course, as > that's TfL not Southwark) let alone any > improvements in the rail services. Every time you > add a concern you add another nail in the coffin > of cars in Southwark, the stated aim of the > council. Precisely what they are up to. It is right out of their standard playbook. They probably already know what draconian scheme they are planning, but will be sequencing the consultation to get the result they want.

Lowlander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Southwark Council...let's be charitable, there is > an element of transparency and accountability with > them. You may not agree with them (90% of the > time I don't), but there you go. And before I'm > accused, the only relationship I have with them is > as a council tax payer. > > Now, EDIBA. They're responsible for the posters > up and down LL. I've only asked two shop owners, > and they had never heard of EDIBA. They just > agreed to put posters up for someone. > > EDIBA are referenced as a respondee to their CPZ > consultation. > > Next - the validity of the facts has now been > debated on my other thread to death with no > agreement. > > Who is EDIBA? There's no contact. Not even an > anonymous email address or even PO Box. They're > more secret than the Masons. > > Or are ED residents happy for completely anonymous > organisations to campaign on their behalf? Get a life.

The new smaller zone seems like a reasonable compromise given the support in that area. But agree, there is no need for this to run all day if the aim is to target commuters. It also shouldn't apply at weekends with that in mind.

it's official, the 40 bus route to London Bridge and the City is being killed off from 15 June this year. As this thread shows, a big blow to many in ED. Our local councillors have failed to protect this vital service despite massive local opposition. Too slow off the mark if you ask me. https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/central-london/

Don't like it don't go. It's not complicated.

Townleygreen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I should point out, following el Presidente's > comment, that that Southwark has an opposition of > 14 Lib Dem councillors. That makes it NOT a one > party state. Lewisham - in comparison - IS such a > one-party state, since last may the only non > Labour councillor (a green) lost his seat. A fair and accurate point. But all councillors returned in East Dulwich related wards at the last election were from one party - Labour.

What did people expect? Southwark council is in effect a one party state. look at them: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1 The last vestiges of opposition and accountability were completely wiped out at the last election. Even good councillors like James Barber were thrown out by the people of East Dulwich. This kind of thing is what happens when power is exercised unchecked. With such large majorities they can afford to have complete disdain for their electorate. If you voted Labour at the Council elections, you voted for this. If you didn't, you're stuck with it. This is not a Labour thing per se either, it is a power thing. Too much power without accountability. Answer is to punish them at ballot box. Chance of that happening? Sweet FA.

I refuse to google Calico Bag. I refuse to google Calico bag. I refuse to... oh allright then.

Great to see the old bill sticking it to them at last.

Sazzle30 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I worked for a plc company that allowed you to > self certify sickness for 5 days but for anything > longer you needed a doctors note - perhaps that > requirement has been brought in and the unions > don?t like it that you have to have prove that you > are genuinely ill? > > Be interesting to know exactly what changes the > company are making to their t&cs Why would anyone want to know the facts before coming to a view?

Siduhe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I recently made a enquiry/complaint to TFL about > the increased number of buses I've been on > terminating early at rush hour - spurred on by a > day when I got on 3 x 63 buses one after the other > and none of them ran beyond Blackfriars > > I got the usual brush off reply but it had some > interesting stuff in it, relevant to the plans for > the number 40. TFL's view is that the way to keep > buses running to time with less resources is to > run shorter bus routes and require passengers to > change at least once (but up to two times is > considered acceptable) to get to destinations that > used to be served by a single route. Their theory > is that it's the long bus routes that cause delays > overall and that running shorter routes and > requiring people to change more is the way to keep > things running smoothly and "to provide maximum > service to the main and busiest parts of the > route". Which is exactly what they are proposing > with the 40. > > To the comment above, that seems to assume that > everyone is able to navigate multiple buses with > limited allowance for people with disabilities, > prams, luggage and that it will be possible to > change onto other buses at peak times. The 63 is particularly bad for this. Used to happen all the time when i got it. The 40 less so. It's a good service usually, which makes it all the more annoying that they are getting rid of it. And it seems our local councillors are twiddling their thumbs doing nothing about it...